Skip to main content

Full text of "History of the reformation in Germany and Switzerland chiefly"

See other formats

m .1 

I 1 





1 < 

\ I 
l I, 


I I; 


<^ PRINCETON, N. J. <^* 

PHiiTci^jTo:;: '\ 

taJt/N 1880 

BR 305 .H332 1878 v. 2 
Hagenbach, K. R. 1801-1874. 
History of the reformation 
in Germany and Switzerland 

T. and T. Clark's Publications, 

M E Y E R'S 

Commenfciry on the New Tesfament. 

' Meyer has been long and well known to scholars as one of the very aWest of the German 
expositors of the New Testament. We are not sure whether we ought not to say that he is 
unrivalled as an interpreter of the grammatical and historical meaning of the sacred 
writers. The publishers have now rendered another seasonable and important service to 
English students in producing this translation.'— Gifo/d/nji. 

Tlie Subscription is 21s. for Four Volumes, Demy 8vo, payable in advance. 
Each Volume will be sold separateli/ at (on an average') 10«. 6(/. to Non-Suhscrihers. 



By Dr. H. A. W. METER, 
Oberconsistorialrath, Hannover. 

In order to secure perfect accuracy, the Publishers have placed the whole 
work under the editorial care of Rev. Dr. Dickson, Professor of Divinity in the 
University of Glasgow, Rev. Dr. Crombie, Professor of Biblical Criticism, St. 
Mary's College, St. Andrews, and Rev. Dr. Stewart, Professor of Biblical 
Criticism, University of Glasgow. 

The First Three Years comprise the following works : — 

1st Year — Romans, Two Volumes. 
Galatians, One Volume. 
St, John's Gospel, Vol. I. 

2d Year— St. John's Gospel, Vol. II. 

Philippians and Colossians, One Volume. 
Acts of the Apostles, Vol. I. 
Corinthians, Vol. I. 

3d. Year— Acts of the Apostles, Vol. II. 

St. Matthew's Gospel, Two Vols. 
Corinthians, Vol. II. 

The series will he continued by the publication of Mark and Luke in tioo volumes, and 
Ephesians 7oith Philemon in one, thus completing the New Testament Commentary so far 
as vrritten by Dr. Meyer himself. Biit to this the Publishers propose to add Thessalonians, 
by Dr. Ltinemann, in one volume. 

The Series will therefore be Completed in 16 Volumes. 

' I need hardly add that the last edition of the accurate, perspicuous, and learned com- 
mentary of Dr. Meyer has been most carefully consulted throughout : and I must again, 
as in the preface to the Galatians, avow my great obligations to the .Tcumen and scholar- 
ship of the learned editor.' — Bishop Ellicott in Preface to his ' Commentary on Ephesians.' 

' The ablest grammatical exegete of the age.' — Phit.ip Sthaff, D.D. 

' In accuracy of scholarship and freedom from prejudice, he is equalled by few.' — 
Literary Churchman. 

' We have only to repeat that it remains, of its own kind, the very best Commentary 
of the New Testament which we possess.'— Church Bdls. 

' No exegetical work is on the whole more valuable, or stands in higher public esteem. 
As a critic he is candid and cautious; exact to minuteness in philology; a master of the 
grammatical and historical method of interpretntion.' — Princeton Revifw. 

T. and T. Clarlz s PiLblications. 

In Twenty-four Handsome Svo Volumes, Subscription Price jQ6, 6s. od., 

^atc^Nicene (JTijiistian ilii)vari)» 




MESSRS. CLARK are now happy to announce the completion of this Series. 
It has been received with marked approval by all sections of the 
Christian Church in this country and in the United States, as supplying what 
has long been felt to be a want, and also on account of the impartiality, learn- 
ing, and care with wliich Editors and Translators have executed a very diiEcult 

The Publishers do not bind themselves to continue to supply the Series at the 
Subscription price. 

The Works are arranged as follow : — 


Clement's Epistles to thn Coriuthians ; 
Polycarp to the Epbesians; Martyr- 
dom of Polycarp ; Epistle of Barnabas ; 
Epistles of Ignatius(longerand shorter, 
and also the Syriac version); Martyr- 
dom of Ignatius ; Epistle to Dingnelus ; 
Pastor of Hennas; Papias ; Spurious 
Epistles of Ignatius. In One Volume. 

In One Volume. 

mentine Recognitions. In One Volume. 

First, comprising Exiiortation to Hea- 
thon ; The Instructor; and a portion 
of the Miscellanies. 


HIPPOLYTUS, Volume First; Refutation 
of all Heresies, and Fragments from 
Ills ('oninuTitaries. 

IREN^US, Volume First. 


CYPRIAN, Volume First; the Epistles, 
and some uf the Treatises. 


IREN^US (completion); HIPPOLYTUS 
(completion); Frat^ments of Third 
Century. In One Volume. 

ORIGEN: De Principiis; Letters; and 
portion of Treatise against Celsus. 

Second ; Completion of Miscellanies. 

TERTULLIAN, Volume First; To the 
Martyrs; Apology; To the Nations, 


CYPRIAN, Volume Second (completion) ; 

Novatian; Minucius Felix; Fragments. 

copolis; Peter of Alexandria; Anato- 

lius; Clement on Virginity; and 

TERTULLIAN, Volume Second. 

Revelations ; comprising all the very 

curious Apocryphal Writings of the 

first three Centuries. 


TERTUI-LIAN, Volume Third (comple- 

lical Constitutions. In One Volume. 


turgus ; Syrian Fragments. In One 


LACTANTIUS; Two Volumes. 

ORIGP]N, Volume Second (completion). 
I'-'s. to Non-Subscribers. 

iug Fragments. 9s. to Non-Subscri- 

Single Years cannot be had separately, unless to complete sets ; but any Volume 
y be iiad separately, price lOs. 6d., — with the exception of Okigen, Vol. II., 12s.; 

may , _ . ^ 

and the Eaki.y Litl'kgiks. 9s 


MESSRS. CLARK have much pleasure in pubHshing the 
First Issue of the Foreign Theological Library for 
1879, viz. : — 

Hagenbagh'S History of the Reformation. 
Vol. II. Completion. 

Philippi's Commentary on the Romans. 
VoL II. Completion. 

The Second Issue for 1879 li^'M probably be — 

Haupt on the First Epistle of John. 

Steinmeyer on the Passion and Resurrection of Our 
Lord. New edition, prepared by the Author solely for the English 

The following Works are also in preparation : — 

Hagenbach's History of Doctrines. Translated from recent 
edition, and edited, with large additions from various sources, by 
Rev. Prebendary Clark. 

Keil's Archeology. 

Krieberg on the Atonement. 

Delitzsch's System of Apologetics. 

They beg anew to thank the Subscribers for their support, and to 
respectfully request a continuance of it. 

May they ask for an early remittance of the Subscription for 
1879 — 21s. 

Edinburgh, 38 George Street, 
March 1879. 






?^agfnl)aci)'g f^i^torj) of tl\t ^Reformation in @ermani) 
anlj ^Juit^crlantf cijieflD. 



18 79. 















STranslateti from tijc Jourt]^ Eebisctj ©tn'tion of t\)z fficrman 









Death of Frederick the Wise — John the Stedfast — Pliilip 'the Mag- 
nanimous, Landgrave of Hesse — Diet of Speier, 1526 — Francis 
Lambert of Avignon and the Disputation of Homburg— The ]\Iar- 
grave of Brandenburg — Luther's Order of Divine Service — War 
between the Emperor and the Pope — Otto von Pack and the League 
of Breslau — Church Visitation and Luther's Catechisms — Diet of 
Speier, 1529 — The Protestation and its Consequences, 


Further Course of the Swiss Reformation — Anabaptism — Zwingle's 
Treatise on Baptism — Infant Baptism and Anabaptism — Balthasar_ 
Hubmaier — Disputations at Ilanz and Baden, 1526 — Thomas 
Murner, ....■■■• '^'^ 


Results of the Disputation of Baden— Retrograde Movements in Bern 
and Zurich— Calm Progress of Zwingle— Labours of CEcolampaJius 
at Basel— Disturbances in that City— Disputation of Bern and 
Completion of Reform there— Reactionary Attempts— Proceedings 
of the Haslithalers— Further Progress of the Reformation— Ambrose 
Blarer and John Zwick at Constance— John von Bozheim— The 
Reformation in Thurgau— Excesses in the Convent of Kath- 
rinenthal, ....■■■■ ^^ 


Victory of the Reformation in Basel— Order of Reform— The University 
—Simon Grynsus and Sebastian Miinster— Death of Erasmus- 
Reformation in St. Gall and Schaffhausen— Hostile Attitude of the 
Romish and Evangelical Parties— Separate Alliances— First War of 
Cappel— Different Views of Luther and Zwingle concerning the 
Employment of Force — Zwingle's Hymn, . . • • 



The Eiicliaristic Controversy resumed — Conference of Marburg and its 
Results — Francis Lambert — Philip of Hesse — Congress of Schmal- 
kalden — The Schwabach-Torgau Articles — Convocation of the Diet 
of Augsburg — Luther at Coburg — Mercurius Gattinara, . . 96 


The Diet of Augsburg — The Confession of Augsburg — Confutation of the 
Confession — Apology for tlie Confession — Confession of the Four 
Cities — Zwingle's Communication to Charles v. — Eck's Revilings 
and Zwingle's Reply — Imperial Recess — Dissolution of the Diet, . 11.3 


Import of the Confessions — General View of Protestant Doctrine ; or, the 

Principles of Protestantism, ..... 132 


Supplemental Remarks — Martyrdom of Adolph Clarenbach and Peter 
Flystedt at Cologne — Patrick Hamilton in Scotland — Louis Berquin 
in France — Diet of Westeras and Reformation in Sweden — Diet of 
Odense and Reformation in Denmark — Landgrave Philip's Alliance 
with the Swiss — The Schmalkaldic League — Religious Peace of 
Nuremberg — Death of John the Stedfast — Religious AVar in 
Switzerland — Battle of Cappel and Death of Zwingle^Review of 
Zwingle's Character— Solothurn : Mayor Wenge — Death of (Eco- 
lampadius — Henry BuUinger and Oswald Myconius — First Confes- 
sion of Basel, ....... 151 


Romanic Switzerland— William Farel— The Reformation in Neuchatel 
and its Vicinity — Peter Viret — Beginnings of the Reformation in 
Vaud — Geneva and its Parties — Farel, Saunier, Froment, Olivetanus 
— Victory of the Reformation at Geneva, .... 186 


The Prospective Council — Restoration of the Dukedom of Wurtemberg 
by the Peace of Cadan — The Reformation in Wurtemberg and its 
Effects upon Southern Germany — Augsburg, Frankfort-on-the-Main 
— Pomerania — Westphalia— Soest, Padcrborn, Miinster— Tlie Ana- 
baptists and their Kingdom, ..... 206 


Paul III. and his Legate Vergerio — Diet of Schmalkalden — Mediatory 

Ell'orts of Martin Bucer — Endeavours to procure a Union — First 



Helvetic Confession — Luther's Inclination for Peace— Concordia of 
Wittenberg— Schmalkaltlic Articles— Truce of Frankfort— Death of 
George of Saxony — Introduction of the Reformation in Leipsic, 
Berlin, and Halle, ....... 223 


Religious Conferences at Hagenau and "Worms — Diet of Regensburg 
[Ratisbon] — Interim of Regensburg — The Bishopric of Nauniburg — 
Henry of Brunswick — Further Spread of the Reformation — Hilde- 
sheim, Regensburg, etc. — Cologne and Mtinster — Diets of Speier 
and Worms — Protestant Diet at Frankfort-on-the-Main — Luther's 
Journey to Eisleben : his Sickness, Death, and Burial, . . 240 


^ Review of Luther's Character— Outbreak of the Schmalkaldic War— Diet 
of Regensburg — Preparations for War — Sebastian Schartlin — Duke 
Maurice — Battle of Miihlberg — Captivity of the Elector of Sa.\ony — 
Siege and Capture of Wittenberg — Bugenhagen — Fortunes of the 
Landgrave — Maurice at Wittenberg — The Pope and the Council, . 258 


The Armed Diet of Augsburg — The Second Interim — John Agricola, 
John Brenz, and the Swabian Preachers — Pope Julius in. and the 
Synod of Trent — Maurice and the Third Interim (of Leipsic) — False 
Position of Melanchthon — Flacius and the Adiaj)horistic Contro- 
versy — Another Diet at Augsburg — Siege of Magdeburg — Shameful 
Treatment of the Landgrave— Intervention of Maurice — Treaty of 
Passau — Death of Maurice — Religious Peace of Augsburg— Death of 
Charles v., . . . . . . . .277 


John Calvin — His Youth — His Instruction in the Christian Religion — 
His First Labours at Geneva — His Banishment and Residence at 
Strassburg — His Marriage — Sadolet — Calvin recalled to Geneva, . 301 


Calvin's Second Appearance at Geneva — Ecclesiastical Discipline and 
Divine Worship — Ordinances — Controversy with Sebastian Castellio 
— The Libertines (Ameaux, Perrin, Gruet)— Controversy with 
Bolsec — Michael Servetus, his Trial and Execution — Reflections on 
the Employment of Capital Punishment against Heretics — Subse- 
quent Conflicts of Calvin— Berthelier— Founding of the Academy- 
Calvin's Last Days — His Sickness, Death, and Burial, . . 323 

Review of Calvin— The Church of Zurich and the Church of Geneva— 



BuUinf^er — The Consensus of Zurich — Westphal and Calvin — Last 
Days and Death of Melanchthon — The Reformation in France and 
the Netherlands, Huugaiy, Transylvania, Poland, Italy, and the 
Church in Locarno, Si)ain, England, .... .345 


General Remarks — Influence of the Reformation over Politics, Science, 
Art, and Morals — Peculiar Thinkers in the Age of the Reformation : 
Schvvenkfeldt, Sebastian Franck, and others — Apostates : Thamer, 
Wicel, Spiera, ....... 366 


The Catholic Church in the Time of the Reformation — The Council of 
Trent — New Monastic Orders: Capuchins, Paulines (Barnabites), 
Theatines, Somaskers — Ignatius Loyola and the Jesuits — New 
Saints of the Catholic Church — Philip Neri — Peter of Alcantara — 
Saint Theresa — The Romish Inquisition — The Greek Church in thf 
Age of the Reformation, ...... 395 

REC.JUN 1880 










ON" the 5tli of May 1525, previous therefore to Luther's 
marriage, the Elector Frederick the Wise departed 
this life, after having partaken of the Lord's Supper in both 
kinds. From his earliest years a pious son of the Church, 
within whose fold he was born and brought up, his familiar- 
ization with the ideas of the Eeformation had been very 
gradual. He long maintained a waiting attitude in regard 
to the various innovations connected with that event, — a 
circumstance which justly increases our admiration for the 
firmness which he continually displayed in defending the 
person of Luther against his persecutors, even at a time 
when he did not venture to express a decisive opinion in 
regard to the doctrines of that remarkable man. His was 
a manly character. By a careful perusal of the Holy 
VOL. II. ^ 


Scriptures, he became more and more convinced that Luther 
stood upon the pLatform of the divine word. " To guard this 
"word as the apple of his eye " was thenceforth his sincere 
endeavour. In a will drawn up in the very year in which 
Luther exposed his theses, he had made several bequests to 
ecclesiastical foundations and cloisters. These bequests he 
now retracted, having arrived at more enlightened views in 
regard to the institutions that they had been designed to 
benefit. The storms of the Peasant War drew sighs from 
him as he lay upon his sick-bed, and he recommended the 
use of clemency toward the misguided insurgents. Luther 
deeply felt the death of this man.^ Frederick, having died 
without lawful issue, was succeeded by his brother John, 
afterwards called " the Stedfast." 

Great changes had taken place before this time in the 
domain of politics. In February 1525, Charles v. had 
defeated his rival, Francis I. of France, at the battle of 
Pavia. The vanquished monarch was consequently obliged 
to relinquish his claims to Milan and follow the emperor 
to Madrid as a prisoner. Charles failed not to deal out 
menaces against all the German Estates that had been 
negligent in executing the provisions of the Edict of Worms. 
While at Toledo, he appointed a convention of the Diet at 
Augsburg in January 1526. This meeting, however, was 
productive of no special results, it being merely resolved 
that the Estates should reassemble at Speier in the following 
May, " when the cause of the holy faith, of peace, and of right 
should be treated of in a more stately manner." In the 
meantime, separate alliances were formed on both sides. 
The new Elector of Saxony found an important ally in the 

1 "0 mors amara," Luther writes to Spalatin (7th May 1525, De Wette, ii. 
No. 698), ' ' non tain inorientibus, qiiam iis quos relinquunt mortui vivos. " Comp. 
also Letters 698, 700, 701, 705. In the last-mentioned epistle (to John Eiilicl), 
23d Miiy, he connects various signs which had been observable in the heavens 
and on earth with the death of the godly prince : " The sign of his death was a 
rainbow which we, Philip and I, saw one night last winter above the Lochan ; 
another token was a child that was born here at Wittenberg without a head, 
and still another was one born with twisted feet. " 


Landgrave of Hesse, Philip the Magnanimous.^ Philip was 
the only son of the Landgrave William the Middle-Sized 
and the Duchess Anna of Mecklenburg. Losing his father 
at an early period of his life, he was declared of age in his 
fourteenth year (1518) by the old Emperor Maximilian L 
Even previous to this time he had given proofs of his 
chivalric spirit in a struggle with Francis von Sickingen. 
In the year 1523 he married the daughter of Duke George 
of Saxony, the opponent of the Eeformation. Notwithstand- 
ing this connection, however, he himself felt a drawing 
toward Luther and his cause. Since seeing and hearing 
the Eeformer at Worms, and assuring him of his hope that 
God would help him if he was in the right, he had occupied 
himself much with the writings of Luther and with his 
translation of the Bible. The chivalric youug ruler was par- 
ticularly pleased with the character of Melanchthon, whose 
acquaintance he chanced to make in May 1524. As he 
was riding to the shooting gathering \Jjfesellenschiessen\ at 
Heidelberg, he encountered, in the vicinity of Frankfort, a 
man whose whole appearance proclaimed him to be a votary 
of learning, and who was none other than Master Philip, 
at that time on a holiday journey to the Palatinate, his 
native country. Landgrave Philip engaged his learned 
namesake in a conversation of which the Eeformation formed 
the theme, and sought to enlist Melanchthon's interest in 
the evangelization of his domains by requesting his opinion 
on the subject. A result of this interview was visible in 
the fact that the landgrave issued a mandate on the 18 th 
of July in the same year (1524), commanding the preaching 
of the pure gospel throughout his territories. In the Peasant 
War, Philip entered into a close connection with the electoral 
house of Saxony. At Kreuzburg-on-the-Werra he expressed 
to John the Stedfast and his son John Frederick, the prince- 

^ Rommel, PhlUpp cler Grossmfdhige, Landgraf von Hessen, 3 vols., Giessen, 
1830. See also the article by KlUpfel in Herzog's Realenc. xi. pp. 512 


elector, his determination to forfeit life, lands, and every- 
thing rather than give up the word of God. High as was 
the landgrave's estimation of Luther and Melanchthon, he 
also manifested a strong liking for Zwingle. And the Swiss 
Eeformer, in return, placed great confidence in Philip, whom 
he regarded as a man of penetration, magnanimity, and con- 
stancy beyond his years.^ On the 7th of November 1525, 
the two princes, John the Stedfast of Saxony and Philip 
the Magnanimous of Hesse, concluded the preliminaries to 
a close alliance at the hunting castle of Friedewalde in the 
Solinger Forest. In February of the succeeding year they 
again pledged themselves to support each other in case they 
should be attacked on account of their religion. This treaty 
was then ratified at an assembly at Torgau on the 4th of 
May. The offensive and defensive alliance thus formed 
received at Magdeburg, 12 th June, the further accession of 
the Princes of Brunswick - Luneburg, Mecklenburg, Anhalt, 
and Mansfeld, and the city of Magdeburg. Thus equipped 
and joined together, the heads of this evangelical league, the 
Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse, repaired to 
the Diet at Speier, which was opened on the 2oth of June 
1526. At this Diet, Archduke Ferdinand caused a letter 
from liis imperial brother, dated at Seville, to be read. In 
this communication, Charles complained anew of the free 
course which the Lutheran heresy was permitted to take in 
Germany, and emphatically demanded the execution of the 
Edict of Worms. Voices were heard proclaiming that the 
common people had already received too much instruction 
to surrender themselves any longer with simple faith to the 
leading of others. Utterances of this kind found a contrast 
in the episcopal recommendation that all books printed 
within the last eight years should be burned without further 
ceremony. At this imperial assembly, the Landgrave Philip 
distinguished himself above many others by his frankness of 

^ Zwingle calls him "juvenis, setl supra setatem prudens, niagnanimus, et 


speech. He showed (according to the testimony of Spalatin) 
that he was better read in the Scriptures than many a bishop. 
The evangelicals maintained a thoroughly dignified attitude 
throughout the session of the Diet. Their people refrained 
from all frivolities that might give offence to their adversaries. 
Divine service, accompanied with preaching, was daily held 
in their dwellings, at the entrances to which were displayed 
the escutcheons of the inmates, together with the Latin 
inscription, Verhicm Dei manet in mternum (" The word of God 
endureth to eternity "). 

Various conciliatory measures were proposed at the Diet, 
such as the concession of the cup to the laity, the sanction 
of priestly marriages, the diminution of fasts and ceremonies, 
and the combination of a German service with the Latin 
ritual. No decision in regard to these matters was arrived 
at, however. And so, on the 27th of August, the following 
abstract of the resolutions of the Diet was published: — A 
legation shall be sent to the emperor, praying him to come 
himself to Germany and arrange the preliminaries for the 
convocation of a council ; in the meantime, let the conduct of 
every Estate toward its suhjccts, in matters pertaining to the Edict 
of Worms, he such as it shall he ahle to ansioerfor to God and the 
emperor. With the promulgation of this decree a decisive step 
was taken. It laid the foundation of the idea, which was after- 
wards put into practice, of letting the tv/o religions spring up and 
develop side by side in the empire — the principle of parity. 

Landgrave Philip of Hesse now proceeded without delay 
to the accomplishment of the Eeformation in his own 
territories. In the execution of his purpose he availed him- 
self of the assistance of a Frenchman, an exile from his 
native country in the cause of religion, who had received an 
impulse toward the Eeformation from Switzerland, and had 
been in the service of the Landgrave since 1525. 

Francis Lambert,^ born at Avignon in 1487, was the scion 

1 Biographies of Baum (Strassbnrg, 1840), Hessenkamp (Elberfeld, 1860), 
and Pressel in Herzog's Realenc. viii. jip. 170 sqi[. 


of an ancient and noble family. Early deprived of his 
mother, he was brought up in a convent of the Minorites, 
and made the severest principles of that order his own. His 
sermons on repentance produced as powerful effects as had 
once followed those of Savonarola at Florence, Worldlings, 
converted by him and impressed by his cogent appeals, cast 
their pictures, their dice, and their cards into the flames. 
The order of the Minorites was not sufficiently strict for him, 
and he resolved to abandon it for that of the Carthusians. It 
was of just such strenuous characters that the Eeformation 
had need. Never has its cause been served by volatile and 
libertine minds. Lambert's eyes were opened to the evangelical 
faith by the writings of Luther, and, this being the case, he 
was no longer willing to remain in a monastery. Being, in 
the spring of 1522, commissioned to travel on business of the 
convent, he embraced the opportunity to make his escape, and 
took refuge in Switzerland, At Bern, Berthold Haller, to 
whom he repaired, recommended him to apply to Zwingle at 
Zurich, He was still standing on the boundary line between 
the old and the new faith. At a disputation relative to the 
worship of saints, which took place prior to the decisive 
conferences of Zurich, he declared himself conquered. " I 
abandon," said he, "all rosaries and intercessors, and will 
henceforth hold, in all time of need, to God only and to 
Christ our Lord." Under the assumed name of John Serranus 
he proceeded to Basel, and fled across the boundary to 
Germany. In November 1522 he opposed, in a public 
disputation at Eisenach, the prohibition of priestly marriage 
and the practice of oral confession, and in 1523 made his 
appearance at Wittenberg. Luther at first received him with 
some distrust, but afterwards took a liking to him, and in- 
duced him to give exegetical lectures on the prophet Hosea ; 
the lieformer also wrote an introduction to a publication of 
Lambert's.^ The latter afterwards entered the service of 

^ Commentaril in Minor Itarum Rerjidam. 


Two months after the Diet of Speier, on the 21st of August 
1526, a disputation was held at the castle of Homburg, by 
order of the Landgrave of Hesse, and presided over by 
Schrautenbach, the commissary of Government, and Chancellor 
Feige. Francis Lambert and Adam Kraft, the elder Eeformer 
of Hesse, defended — tlie former in Latin and the latter in 
German — the doctrines advanced, in 158 theses, against 
Nicholas Ferber, Guardian of the Franciscan Order, and 
Master John Sperber, pastor of Waldau, near Kassel. 
Lambert Avas victorious in this discussion. His proposi- 
tions relative to the constitution and discipline of the Church 
reposed upon the broadest democratic platform. Every 
individual church, he contended, should have the right to 
choose its own pastor, to whom episcopal authority should 
belong. Lambert recognised no episcopal authority above that 
of individual pastors, therein agreeing with the Church of 
apostolic times. He also maintained that a church should 
have the further right to depose its pastor in case of a non- 
performance of duty. There is, he asserts, a double calling — 
a calling to the state of a Christian, and a calling to the office 
and ministry of the Church. The former of these callings 
must precede the latter. Without the internal calling, the 
external calling is valueless. On these principles it Avas 
proposed to base the constitution of the Church in Hesse, and 
in these principles a rigorous church discipline was, of course, 
involved. A synod, composed of clergy and laity, should be 
convened annually for three days. Before this synod all 
complaints were to be presented, and were then to be investi- 
gated by a committee ; church visitations were instituted, and 
to the visitors the right was accorded to depose all who should 
be found unworthy. " Whoso denieth the Lord Jesus Christ and 
His word " (thus ran the formula of prohibition), " let him be 
put away from our midst. But Christ's peace, mercy, and truth 
be with all who call upon Him. Amen." Luther was con- 
strained to approve of this ecclesiastical constitution so far as its 
theory was concerned, but held that it did not admit of being 


practically carried out, since there was not a sufficiency of men 
to uphold its provisions.^ Lambert went farther than Luther 
in matters connected with divine worship as well as in things 
pertaining to church government. Images, organs, and bells 
were interdicted in Hesse as in Switzerland ; the number of 
holy days was diminished ; and for private confession, a general 
confession of sins by the congregation, previous to participation 
in the Lord's Supper, was substituted. In the doctrine of the 
Lord's Supper, Lambert still adhered to Luther ; at a later 
period (after the discussion at Marburg) we shall see him 
adopt the views of Zwingle. One of the most precious fruits 
of the Hessian Eeformation was the foundation of the University 
of Marburg on the 30th of May 1527. Lambert was 
appointed to a professorial chair in this institution, and 
proved to be a stimulating and beloved instructor, although, 
from the mere fact of his being a foreigner, he did not lack 
opponents who desired to preserve undisturbed the German 
character of the Eeformation.^ From Hesse the Reformation 
was introduced into the neighbouring provinces, the principali- 
ties of Lippe and Waldeck, the counties of Solms, Eietberg, 
Hersfeld, Fulda, and Fritzlar. 

In consequence of the Diet of Speier, a third princely house 
of Germany, that of Franconia and Brandenburg, assumed a 
prominent position by the side of Electoral Saxony and 
Hesse in the Evangelical Alliance. Of the ten sons of 
Frederick the Elder, three here attract our notice — first, 
Casimir, who governed at Kulmbach and Baireuth ; second, 
George the Pious, who ruled at Anspach ; and third, Albert, 
since 1511 Grand Master of the Teutonic Order in Prussia. 
Margrave Casimir, the husband of a Bavarian princess, adhered 
to the Eoman Catholic party, while Margrave George of Bran- 
denburg decided in favour of the Eeformation. Casimir held 

^ The Heman Ecclesiastical Constitution has been recently lepuLlished by 
CK)a)XER at Giessen, 1852. 

- Conip. KoMMEL, I.e. vol. iii. ; Suduoff, article " Hessen," in Herzog's 


a Diet at Anspach in October 1526, at wliicli; it is true, the 
general principle was laid down that ministers should preach 
nothing but the pure word of God. Notwithstanding this, 
however, the mass was to continue to be celebrated in Latin, 
the duty of fasting was to be enjoined upon the people, 
and innovations in general were to be kept at a distance. 
Casimir soon afterwards lost his life in an expedition against 
the Hungarians, when the government devolved upon the 
Margrave George, who, in the year 1528, established all 
things upon an evangelical footing. In regard to Margrave 
Albert, we have already stated that by Luther's advice he 
resigned his Grand-Mastership to the crown of Poland in 
1525 (in accordance with the peace of Cracow), and turned 
Prussia into a dukedom. After this secularization of his 
domains, Albert, regarding himself as no longer bound by 
any religious vow, entered into the state of matrimony, and 
was united to the Danish Princess Dorothea, daughter of King 
Frederick i. 

The work of the Reformation, meantime, became more and 
more firmly established in the Electorate of Saxony. On the 
twentieth Sunday after Trinity in 1525, the Lord's Supper 
was for the first time celebrated in the German language at 
Wittenberg. It cost some trouble, however, to carry out 
this innovation, especially in the country, the minds of the 
people having been intimidated by the Peasant War. Luther 
now brought forward in the Saxon lands his programme of 
a German Order of Divine Service (German mass^), which is 
well worthy of our closer consideration. " Above all things," 
Luther thus addresses his readers, " I most affectionately, 
and for God's sake, beseech all who see or desire to observe 
this, our Order of Divine Service, on no account to make it 
a compulsory law, or to ensnare or captivate the conscience 

' The term "mass," which in reality is unexceptionable (being the old Mlssa 
est), was retained by Luther, while the Zwinglian Reformation abolished the name 
together with the thing. The Order of Divine Service may be found in Luther g 
Werhe (Walch, x.), and in Maeheikeke, vol. ii. pp. 207 sq^i. 


of any thereby, but to use it, agreeably to Christian liberty 
and their good pleasure, as where, when, and as long as 
circumstances favour and demand it." So far was Luther 
from wishing to impose his practices upon others. He de- 
cidedly expressed himself to the effect that it was not his 
expectation that all Germany would adopt the system of 
Wittenberg. The idea of liturgical uniform.ity, to which so 
many, even in the Protestant Church, attach such value, was 
utterly foreign to his mind. " In fine, we institute this order 
not for the sake of those who are Christians already, for 
they have need of none of these things, nor do they live 
for them ; but they live for the sake of those who are not 
yet Christians, that they may make them Christians ; they 
have their divine service in their spirits. But it is necessary 
to have such an order for the sake of those who are to become 
Christians or are to grow stronger, just as a Christian lias 
need of baptism, the word, and the sacrament, not as a 
Christian, for as such he has them already, but as a sinner. 
But above all, the order is for the simple and for the young folk, 
who must daily be exercised and educated in the Scripture 
and God's word, to the end that they may become con- 
versant with Scripture and expert in its use, ready and skilful 
in giving an answer for their faith, and able in time to teach 
others and aid in the advancement of the kingdom of Christ. 
For the sake of such we must teach, preach, write, and devise ; 
and if it could in any wise assist or promote their interests, I 
would have all the bells pealed and all the organs sounded, and 
let everything make a noise that could." 

Luther laid down three different forms of divine service, of 
which the first is the Latiii mass. It is a noteworthy fact 
that Luther did not desire the complete abolition of this. And 
why did he not desire it ? Certainly not from any predi- 
lection for Rome, as the seat of the pope, but from love 
for the language of antiquity, and, indeed, for languages in 
general. We know how highly he esteemed the ancient 
languages, and how earnestly he recommended the study of 

Luther's order of divine service. 11 

them. " I am," says he, " most deeply interested in our youth ; 
and if the Greek and Hebrew tongues were as familiar to us 
as the Latin, and possessed as great store of fine music and 
song as that does, were I able to bring it about, mass should 
be celebrated, and there should be singing and reading in our 
churches on alternate Sundays in all four languages — German, 
Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. I am by no means of the mind of 
those who set all their love upon one language, despising every 
other ; for I would gladly raise up a generation able to be of 
use to Christ in foreign lands " (a missionary idea here thrills 
through his breast), " and to converse with the people of such 
countries, so that we might not be like the Waldenses in 
Bohemia, whose faith is so involved in the toils of their own 
tongue that they can talk intelligibly and plainly with no one 
unless he first learn their language. It is not thus that the 
Holy Ghost proceeded in the beginning ; He did not wait until 
the world should come to Jerusalem and learn Hebrew, but 
endowed the office of the ministry with all manner of tongues, 
so that the apostles could speak to the people wherever they 
went.-^ I should prefer to follow this example, and it is right 
also that the youth should be practised in many languages. 
Who knows how God will make use of them in years to come? 
It is for this end also that schools are established." 

As the second form of divine service, Luther proposes the 
German mass, i.e. divine service in the German language, 
"for the sake of the simple laymen." This is the ;puUic 
service of God, or, to use a modern phrase, the cult of the 
church of the masses. In regard to this Luther had by no 
means very ideal conceptions. There are " many who attend 
upon the public worship of God who are not yet believers 
or Christians ; the greater part stand and gape, that they may 
see something new ; and it is just as though we celebrated 
the service of God on an open square or field amongst Turks 
or heathen" (a missionary sermon). To Luther, therefore, the 

1 An apprehension of the Pentecostal gift of tongnes that could scarcely be 
justified from a historico-exegetical point of view. 


public worship of the sanctuary was by no means that which 
it has been subsequently apprehended to be, — the expression 
of already existent Christian life, — but was primarily nothing 
but an allurement to faith and Christianity. 

But. a2:ain. he treats of a " third method which the true 
type of evangelical order should embrace." This third form of 
divine service should not, he thinks, be celebrated " publicly 
among all the people ; " but " those who are desirous of being 
Christians in earnest, and are ready to profess the gospel with 
hand and mouth, should register their names and assemble in 
some private house to pray, to read, to baptize, to receive 
the sacrament, and practise other Christian works. In this 
order, those whose conduct was not such as is befitting 
Christians, might be recognised, reproved, reformed, rejected, 
or excommunicated, in accordance with the rule laid down by 
Christ" (Matt, xviii. 15 sqq.). Have we, then, here the very 
idea of a little church within a church {ccclcsiola in ecclesia), 
that was at a later period evoked by Spener, Zinzendorf, and 
the Methodists? — conventicles of the elect, Brunnstuben ["reser- 
voirs (of piety) "], as Bengel called them ? Most certainly. 
"But" — and note well this mighty "but," — " But," adds Luther, 
with just tact and instinct, " I cannot and would not order 
or arrange such a congregation or assembly at present." And 
why not ? "I have not the requisite persons for it, nor do 
I see many who are urgent for it." " But should it come to 
pass that I must do it, — that I am so pressed upon as to be 
unable with a good conscience to leave it undone, — then will 
I gladly do my part to secure it, and will assist it as best I 
can." " In the meantime, I would abide by the two aforesaid 
methods, and publicly among the people aid in the promotion 
of such divine service, besides preaching, as shall exercise 
the youth, and call and incite others to faith, until those 
Christians who are most thoroughly in earnest shall discover 
each other and cleave together, to the end that there may he no 
faction-forming (sectional partyism), such as might ensue if I 
were to take the management of the whole matter upon 

luthek's order of divixe service. 13 

myself; for we Germans are a savage, rude, tempestuous 
people, not lightly to be led into anything new, unless there 
be most urgent occasion." We see that this thorough German 
was not so prejudiced in his Germanity as to refrain from a 
plain statement of what he found amiss in his own people. 

Meanwhile that which seemed to him of greatest importance 
was- the development of the youth of Germany into a truly 
Christian people. " In the name of God, the first requisite in 
the German system of divine worship is a good, plain, simple, 
and substantial catechism. A catechism is a form of instruc- 
tion, by which heathen, desirous of becoming Christians, are 
taught and shown what they are to believe, to do, to leave 
undone, and to know in Christianity ; hence pupils who were 
admitted to such instruction, and were acquiring the rudiments 
of the Christian faith, were called catechumens previous to 
their reception of baptism." He then enters upon a somewhat 
ample dissertation as to the proper compilation of such a 
catechism. ISTot long afterwards (in 1529) he presented to 
the Church liis large and small catechisms, which are justly 
regarded as model works of their kind. Without a solid 
catechetical foundation, all preaching seemed to him but 
labour lost. " Many a man listens to preaching for three or 
four years without learning enough from it to enable him to 
make answer, if questioned concerning a single article of the 
faith. Of the truth of this statement I have daily experience." 

Yet in the worship of the sanctuary he undoubtedly 
regarded preaching as paramount to all else — as " the greatest 
and most essential thing." We have already remarked that 
Zwingle departed from the time-honoured use of the pericopes, 
and connectedly explained whole books of Scripture ; while 
in this, as in other points, Luther adhered to the ancient 
custom. We should, however, be mistaken were we to 
suppose that Luther regarded this system as the only correct 
one. He says : "The reason why we have retained the division 
of the Epistles and Gospels into portions corresponding with 
the different seasons of the [church] year, as has been the 


custom hitherto, is, that we can see nothing especially censur- 
able in such an arrangement." " In so doing, however, we 
have no thought of censuring those who take up the entire 
books of the Evangelists." Luther assigned the exposition of 
the Gospels to the week-day services, appointing Monday for 
the " one Evangelist," Matthew, and reserving Saturday after- 
noon at vespers for his favourite John. 

"In regard to Sunday" he continues, "we sanction the reten- 
tion of the chasuble, altar, and candles, until such time as they 
all shall change of themselves, or it shall please us to change 
them ; but if any will do differently in these respects, we shall 
not hinder them." Luther, therefore, set no value on these 
externalities, he simply retained them for the time being. He, 
however, laid more stress upon the continuance of the custom 
of elevating the bread and wine at the celebration of the 
Lord's Supper, and also retained the Sandus, but ordered it to 
be sung in German, he having himself set it to music. The 
conclusion of the book is worthy of particular notice : " In 
fine, this and every other Order is so to be used as that, an 
abuse arising therefrom, it shall immediately be abolished and 
another made ; just as the brazen serpent, which God Himself 
had commanded to be made, was broken in pieces and destroyed 
by King Hezekiah, because the children of Israel were misusing 
it. For ordinances are intended to serve for the furtherance 
of faith and love, and not for the detriment of faith. When 
they no longer perform that for which they are designed, they 
are dead and gone already, and are no more of any value ; as 
when a good coin that has been counterfeited is, on account 
of its abuse, revoked and altered ; or as when new shoes 
become old, or pinch, and are not worn any more, but are cast 
away, and others are purchased. Order is an outside thing ; 
be it as good as it may, it is liable to be abused. In such 
case, however, it is no longer order, but disorder. Therefore 
no ordinance "can stand or is binding of itself, or is deserving 
of such estimation as has been accorded to the papal ordinances 
hitherto ; but the life, dignity, strcngtli, and virtue of any 


ordinance is the just use wliich is made of it, otherwise it is 
of no account at all." 

During all this time fresli clouds were gathering on the 
political horizon. Pope Clement had espoused the cause of 
Francis i., and had released him from the oath which he 
had taken at Madrid. At the same time England united 
with France and the pope against Charles, in an alliance 
entitled the Holy League, and Charles found himself forced 
into a war with the pope, which, in a different form, and under 
different circumstances, renewed the old spectacle of hostilities 
between emperor and pontiff. The house of Colonna, from of 
old inimical to the Eoman See, offered itself as an instrument 
of imperial vengeance. Supported by it, the imperial troops 
invaded Eome in the autumn of 1.526, and plundered the 
Vatican, the Basilica of St. Peter, and the palaces of the Medici 
(the pontifical family). The pope himself was obliged to take 
refuge in the castle of St. Angelo, and was finally compelled 
to accede to a treaty with the Colonnas. In the spring of 
1527, however, the war was renewed. The Constable of 
France, Charles de Bourbon, having fallen out with the court 
of France, fled to the imperial court, and there sought occupa- 
tion as a warrior. He collected an army for the emperor, 
consisting of Spaniards and Italians, who were also joined by a 
force of 12,000 Germans, under the conduct of General George 
Frundsberg. On the 5th of May, Bourbon advanced upon the 
Holy City, which, by reason of the confidence that the pope 
reposed upon the peace concluded with the Colonnas, was 
bereft of all assistance. The city was taken by storm. Bourbon 
himself fell in the struggle. For nine days Ptome was aban- 
doned to the ruthless hands of the soldiery. During this time 
the finest works of art were destroyed. The pope, together with 
a portion of his court, found an asylum in the castle of St. 
Angelo, where for seven months he was held prisoner by the 
imperial troops. Under the windows of the fortress the 
German infantry shouted their huzzahs for Luther, and with 
soldierly rudeness derided the ceremonies of the Piomish 


Church. It was only upon hard conditions that the pope was 
finally released from his durance, and a peace concluded. 
Among the terms of this peace was included a demand for a 
council, to be convoked for the purpose of putting an end to 
religious errors. Simultaneously with these events, King 
Ferdinand, who had recently come into possession of the throne 
of Hungary and Bohemia, published a severe edict against 
every departure from the Eomish faith and its usages. That, 
however, w^hich more than these threats disquieted the minds 
of the Protestants and appeared to justify the taking of war- 
like measures, was the rumour of a "notable proceeding against 
the Lutherans." Otto von Pack, one of the councillors of 
Duke George of Saxony, confidentially communicated to Land- 
grave Philip of Hesse a terrible secret, relative to a plot 
formed at Breslau, by the adherents of the Papacy, on the 12th 
of May 1527. Ferdinand, King of Hungary and Bohemia, 
the Elector of Mentz and Brandenburg, the Archbishop of 
Salzburg, and the Bishops of Bamberg and Wiirzburg, Duke 
George of Saxony, and Dukes William and Lewis of Bavaria, 
had, it was declared, formed themselves into an alliance for 
the purpose of invading the Electorate of Saxony and com- 
pelling the surrender of Luther and all heretical preachers, 
priests, monks, and nuns, and the restoration of the ancient 
usages of the Church. Should these conditions not be complied 
with, King Ferdinand and the Elector of Mentz proposed to 
overrun the Saxon, Misnian, and Thuringian provinces, whilst 
Duke George would carry his arms into Moravia, Silesia, and 
Lusatia, a similar procedure being in contemplation in regard 
to the city of Magdeburg. As a special favour, a more lenient 
treatment was in prospect for Landgrave Philip, in consideration 
of his being the son-in-law of Duke George ; this clemency 
was to be accorded him, however, only upon condition of his 
return to the Catholic faith. 

Of this treaty Pack produced only a copy, but promised to 
put the landgrave in possession of the original for the sum of 
4000 florins. These disclosures, which Philip failed not to 


communicate to his allies of the Electorate of Saxony, John 
and John Frederick, were received with the greatest con- 
sternation. Preparations for war were immediately made, 
and an estimate was taken of the forces which could be 
brought into the field. The landgrave transmitted the copy 
of the treaty to his father-in-law, assuring him of his regret 
at being obliged to take up arms against him, but stating at 
the same time his determination not to swerve one hand's- 
breadth from the faith, and declaring that not even the 
" friendship " (relationship) which existed between them 
could induce him to depart from this resolution. To his no 
small astonishment, however, the landgrave was informed 
that the whole story was purely an invention of Otto von 
Pack, who had hoped to realize a nice little sum by it. 
Sarcastic comments upon the credulity of the deceived 
princes were rife meantime. The matter was adjusted. The 
inventor of the fiction, who had not hesitated at other falsifica- 
tions, was banished from the country. Luther, however, 
either could not or would not be convinced that there was 
not some truth in the story, though, faithful to his principles, 
he was adverse to all reprisals ; " for," said he, " we should not 
paint the devil on the door or invite him to be godfather."^ 
'No greater disgrace, he declared, could befall the gospel than 
if the insurrection of the peasants should be succeeded by a 
similar procedure on the part of the princes — a thing that 
would be the ruin of Germany; nothing is gained by affronts and 
blows, for "'whoso taketh the sword shall perish by the sword.'" 
Let us turn from this false rumour of war to the contempla- 
tion of a more peaceful work, which was effected in the 
year 1528 — we refer to the visitation of the churches of 
Saxony.^ Prior to this visitation, Melanchthon despatched 
papers of instructions to all the pastors of the electorate, 
together with an order of exercises for churches and schools, 
revised by Luther; he also furnished the visitors with 

^ Comp. Luther's Briefe unci Bedenhen, De Wette, iii. Nos. 984-988. 
* Comp. the Briefe, I.e. Nos. 985-988, 1001-1014. 


instructions.^ Sucli pastors as were tlioroiiglily incompetent 
were to be discharged, while the weak were to be borne with 
patiently. Experience showed that really good pastors were 
not to be found " as thick as grass," and it was the perception 
of this very fact that induced Luther to compile his catechisms. 
In the preface to his smaller catechism, he says : " I have 
been constrained and impelled to put this catechism or system 
of Christian doctrine into so minute, plain, and simple a form 
by the lamentable and wretched need for it with which I 
have recently become acquainted as a visitor of the churches. 
God help us ! what mournful instances I have witnessed of 
that utter ignorance of the doctrines of Christianity which 
prevails among the common people, and especially among 
that portion of them who inhabit the villages. Many pastors 
also, alas ! are utterly unfit and incompetent to teach. And 
yet they are all called Christians, they are baptized and attend 
upon the holy sacraments. They know neither Our Father, 
nor the Creed, nor the Ten Commandments, but live like 
cattle and irrational swine. Yet now that the gospel has come, 
they have learned excellently well to make a masterly abuse 
of Christian liberty. For God's sake, therefore, I beseech you 
all, my dear sirs and brethren who are pastors and preachers, 
to attend heartily upon your ministry and to have compassion 
upon your people who are commended to your charge, and 
to help us to acquaint the people, especially the young folk, 
with the catechism, to lay these tables and forms before you, 
and to instruct the people in them word by word," etc. 

The smaller catechism was intended to be committed to 
memory by the youtli, while the larger was designed as a 
manual for teachers. Both have not only been translated into 
almost all languages and passed through numerous revisions, 
but even to the present day they are not easily to be excelled 
in point of simplicity, earnestness, and popularity of style. 

^ The inspection of morals was committed to superintendents. This title, 
which was occasionally to be met with in the old Church, became the customary 
term in the Lutheran Church. 


In these catechisms Luther adhered to the form, sanctioned 
by long usage, of taking as three main articles of his system 
of instruction, the Ten Commandments, the Apostle's Creed, 
and the Lord's Prajer. The first article, he affirmed, tells a 
Christian wlicd he is to do and u-hat he is to leave undone ; 
the second directs him to the source whence the first derives 
its authority ; and the third points him to the fountain whence 
he may obtain strength to fulfil the requisitions of the divine 
law. To these Luther added, as his fourth and fifth main 
articles, the institutions of baptism and the Lord's Supper. 

What we have already said in regard to Luther's transla- 
tion of the Bible will apply, on a diminished scale, to his 
catechisms. In the latter, as well as in the former, we behold 
a heart which not only beats for its people, and especially for 
the youth of the nation, but which has grown into union with 
the heart of the people and the youth, and therefore knows 
the exact tone in which they are to be addressed. Let us 
listen to his own words on the subject : " I am a doctor and 
preacher, and as learned and experienced as any of those 
persons who are so arrogant and self-confident.^ I still do as 
a child to whom the catechism is being taught, and in the 
morning, and whenever I have time, read and repeat, word 
for word. Our Father, the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the 
Psalms, etc. ; nor can I yet acquit myself as I would, but 
must remain a child and pupil of the catechism, which I 
also do gladly." His admirable interj^retation of the language 
of Scripture, not in strained definitions of the schools, but in 
simple images drawn from ordinary life, may be illustrated by 
his explanation of the fourth petition of the Lord's Prayer : 
" When thou askest for daily bread, thou askest for every- 
thing that is requisite to enable thee to have and to enjoy 
thy daily bread, and petitionest for exemption from all that 

MIe refers here to those "slow bellies and self-confident saints," those 
" clowns and churls," some of them among the nobility, who maintained that 
there was no longer any necessity for pastors or preachers, declaring that people 
had their duty laid down in books and could learn it for themselves. 


can hinder thee from having it. Thou must therefore open 
wide thy thoughts and send them abroad, not only into the 
oven or the ilour barrel, but into the broad fields and the 
whole land, that beareth and bringeth to us daily bread and 
all manner of nourishment." And he also confessedly includes 
under this head of daily bread, not only "meat and drink, 
raiment, house, and shelter," but also " a healthy body, a good 
wife, good children and servants, faithful neighbours, kind 
friends," etc.-^ 

The new Diet of Speier, convoked from Valladolid by the 
emperor on the 1st of August 1528, was now imminent. 
It was to have been opened on the 1st day of February 
1529, but was delayed until the 15th March. Frederick, the 
count-palatine, represented the absent emperor. Count John 
Thomas de Pico de Mirandola appeared as the pope's legate. 
Eck and Faber were also present and exerted a powerful 
influence. The Catholic party had decidedly the ascendancy. 
Some princes who had hitherto been favourable to the 
Eeformation were even induced to alter their opinions in 
regard to it. The sentiment of the majority was in favour of 
declaring the deliverance of the former Diet of 1526 invalid. 
It was resolved to send an address to the emperor, petitioning 
him to assemble a council. Meanwhile all further innovations 
in religious matters were to be prohibited. The minority 
Avere not allowed to be heard, but were required to submit 
themselves unconditionally to the majority. It was impos- 
sible, however, to comply with such a requisition. The 
Evangelicals openly declared that in matters which concerned 
the glory of God and eternal salvation, a settlement by the 
voice of the majority was improper and impracticable ; every 

^ He also strove to preclude the possibility of false doctrinal conceptions, as is 
evidenced by his interpretation of the article in the Creed concerning the 
resurrection of the flesh [ffapxii, rendered in the English version of the Creed 
by body]. " Tliis exj)ression is not good German ; for when we Germans hear 
the word^esA., our thoughts go no farther than the shambles. In good German 
we should say, ' The resurrection of the bodi/, or corpse,' not in an earthly, but 
in a (jlorifled body, that it may be like unto Christ's glorified body." 


man must conscientiously answer for his own convictions. 
Failing to obtain a hearing, they drew up in the " Eetscher 
Palace" a written prof estation, and demanded that it should be 
appended to the decrees of the Diet. This protestation was 
signed by John, the Elector of Saxony ; George, Margrave of 
Brandenburg; Dukes Ernest and Francis of Brunswick- 
Liineburg ; Landgrave Philip of Hesse ; Prince Wolfgang of 
Anhalt; and the Chancellor of Liineburg (Dr. Forster). It 
was likewise supported by the fourteen imperial cities of 
Strassburg, Nuremberg, Ulm, Costnitz, Lindau, Memmingen, 
Kempten, Nordlingen, Heilbronn, Pteutlingen, Issny, St. Gall, 
Weissenborn, and Windsheim. From this protestation, framed 
on the 20th of April 1529, the Evangelicals received the 
name of Protestants^ — a name which has since obtained a 
wider significance, and has frequently, indeed, been too broadly 
applied to all protesting. Duke Henry of Brunswick and 
Margrave Philip of Baden still endeavoured to effect an 
adjustment between the papal and evangelical parties, but, 
owing to the disaffected state of men's minds, met with no 
encouragement. An embassy, consisting of John Ehinger, 
burgomaster of Memmingen, Michael von Kaden, syndic of 
the city of Nuremberg, and Alexius Frauentraut, private 
secretary to Margrave George of Brandenburg, also met with 
a most ungracious reception from the emperor, whom the 
ambassadors encountered in September at Piacenza."^ 

The Evangelical states, thus thrown upon their own resources, 
beheld themselves compelled to take measures to defend their 
rights. A Diet was held at Kotach (in Coburg), at which the 
conclusion of an alliance was contemplated. The necessary 
document was drawn up, and nothing was wanting to its 
validity save the signatures of the assembled deputies, when 
a scruple was raised by the theologians of Wittenberg. The 

1 Jung, Geschichte des Reichstags zu Spekr, Strassburg and Leipsic, 1830 ; 
Ranke, I.e. 

2 Von Kaden fell sick at Genoa, but arrived later at liis place of destination. 
The other two deputies were even treated as prisoners, and compelled to follow 
the emperor to Parma. 


ground of tlieir hesitancy was as follows. Strassburg and 
Ulm had fallen under suspicion in regard to the doctrine 
Avhich they held concerning the Lord's Supper. Could there 
be any union with misbelievers for the purpose of defending 
the common faith ? Against such a union Luther warned 
the assembly with the utmost earnestness. It might come 
to pass, he declared, as it is wTitten in the seventh chapter of 
Joshua, that for the sake of the one Achan the whole people 
might be destroyed. The Elector of Saxony agreed perfectly 
with his theologians. The Landgrave of Hesse, on the 
contrary, regarded the scruple as sheer theological stubborn- 
ness; whilst Luther, in return, accused the landgrave of too 
great heat.^ Thus, nothing was effected at Eotach, and the 
settlement of the matter under consideration was postponed 
to a future time. The landgrave, however, did all in his 
power to remove the obstacle which had presented itself. 
Should, he demanded, everything be made to depend upon 
the article of the Lord's Supper ? Was no agreement in 
regard to it possible ? Should not one more attempt be made 
to come to an understanding ? What if the men, whose feuds 
had hitherto been conducted on paper, should be summoned 
to an oral disputation, at which they could look each other in 
the face and speak mouth to mouth ? Such thoughts as these 
agitated the mind of Philip, and he determined to take issue 
on the matter in a public discussion, which he appointed to 
be held at his University of Marburg in October 1529. 

But before betaking ourselves to Marburg as spectators of 
this discussion, it will be necessary for us to make another 
tour of inspection to Switzerland, and devote our attention for 
a time to the further course of the Keformation in that country. 
Afterwards we shall resume the thread of the sacramental 
controversy, which we let fall in the year 152G, and pursue 
it to the instant of the personal meeting in Marburg for an 
oral continuation of the conflict. 

^ Coiiip. the Letters, Dk Wette, vol. iii. Nos. 1105 and 1113. 






WE have already devoted five chapters ( xiv.) to a 
consideration of the inception, and, in part, also the 
accomplishment, of the Eeformation in Switzerland, having 
paid special regard to the execution of the work in Zurich. 
As in Wittenberg the quiet development of the Eeformation, 
begun by Luther and Melanchthon, was disturbed by the 
proceedings of Karlstadt, Munzer, and the prophets of Zwickau, 
so the Swiss Eeformation had sustained an admixture of 
heterogeneous elements which were connected in part with 
the Wittenberg disturbances and the leaders thereof. Thomas 
Munzer, after leaving Saxony, had repaired to Switzerland, 
and had even visited (Ecolampadius at Basel and endeavoured 
to gain his favour, but his true nature speedily revealed itself.^ 
From Basel he proceeded to Schaffhausen and Klettgau, and 
thence spread his net in the direction of Waldshut, where he 
found a congenial associate in Balthasar Hubmaier, and aided 
in revolutionizing the peasants of the Black Forest. Even 
prior to the appearance of Munzer, voices had been lifted up 
in Zurich and East Switzerland, clamouring for further pro- 
gress, as is evident from the second disputation of Zurich 
(1523). The Zwickau prophets had already called infant 

' While at Basel he succeeded in gaining over to his views Ulrich Hugwald, a 
man of learning. 


baptism a " farce." Hitherto, however, a theoretical denial of 
the validity of the practice iu question was all that had been 
attempted. Anabaptism, with all its social consequences, was 
actually set on foot for the first time in Switzerland. Here, 
jMunzer's ideas fell on fertile soil. As leaders of the Swiss 
sect of the Anabaptists, the following men at once engage 
our attention : ^ — Lewis Hetzer, Conrad Grebel, and Felix 
Manz, in Zurich ; Balthasar Hubmaier, preacher at Waldshut, 
and also for some time a resident of St. Gall ; Laurence 
Hochreutener, Wolfgang Ullmann, John Brodtlein, George 
Blaurock, William EoubHn, of whom we already know some- 
thing, and many others. A few of these men — such, for 
instance, as Grebel — were not destitute of cultivation. This 
person was descended from a respectable family, and at first 
enjoyed the friendship of Zwingle and Vadianus, having even 
taken to wife a sister of the latter. The old historian 
Hottinger ^ describes him as " a learned but mclandiolic man." 
According to other accounts, Grebel was one of those persons 
who, possessing a good deal of talent, but little morality, are 
most comfortable when they can drown the reproaches of 
conscience in the tumult of passion, and forget themselves 
in the disorders to which they incite others. He seemed 
precisely calculated to be a misleader of the people, an 
agitator and instigator of riot in a time full of confusion. 
After trying in vain to persuade the judicious Zwingle to 
favour his plans, he came to a positive rupture with him 
and with Zurich. In company with Felix Manz, he ran, 
one day, through the streets of Zurich like a madman, 
crying woe to the city. Zwingle was declared to be the 
great dragon, the evangelical teachers were accused of being 
thieves and murderers, and an appeal was made to the voice 

^ Our chief sources of information here are ButLiNGER, Von der Wiedertdufer 
UrspruiKj, Secten, Wesen, 1560 ; Ott, Annales Anabaptistid, 1671 ; Gast, De 
Anahaj)tlsmi exordio, erroribus, historiis ahominandis, etc. Comp. several 
utterances of Zwingle in Sciiuler and Scuultiiess' edition of his German 
writings, vol. i. Part ii., and Hottingee, I.e. 

■ Helv. Kirchen'j. vol. iii. p. 219. 


of the people, through which, it was affirmed, the voice of God 
would speak. 

These men commenced their disorderly proceedings at 
ZoUikow, near Zurich. They began with a wanton destruction 
of images and altars (even a baptismal font was overturned 
and broken in pieces). Brodtlein, being deposed ^ on account 
of these extravagances, gave his adherents a farewell banquet, 
at which a large proportion of the guests, whose imaginations 
were heated by fanatical representations, demanded baptism ; 
and they, after having received this sacrament, in their turn 
baptized others. In like manner, Manz and Grebel went about 
from house to house, dispensing with their own hands the 
Lord's Supper, or, as they said, " setting up the table of God." 
Nightly meetings were held, at which portions of the Bible 
were read and commented upon, and all sorts of prophecies 
were delivered. Similar occurrences took place at about the 
same time in Waldshut, where Balthasar Hubmaier, who 
assembled a strong party of adherents in that town, called his 
followers together on Easter eve of the year 1525, and, after 
having some water brought to him in a milk-pail, solemnly 
re-baptized three hundred persons.^ 

Such phenomena naturally excited much attention. That 
Catholic Governments, such as that of Austria, of which 
Waldshut was a dependency, took violent measures for their 
suppression, may readily be imagined. Nor could those 
Governments which had been favourable to the Reformation, 
as that of Zurich, for instance, be indifferent to such pro- 
ceedings. It was by things like these that the very essence 
of the Eeformation was itself imperilled, and a door thrown 
wide open to inrushing disorders. But before we examine 
into the measures that were taken against the Anabaptists in 
the different districts of Switzerland, we must enter upon a 

» [He was pastor at Zollekow. See D'Aubign^'s Hist. Ref. vol. iii. p. 233.— 

2 Comp. SOHM, Geschichteder Stadtpfarrei Waldshut, ein Merkwilrdiger Beitraff 

ziir Wiedertau/er f/eschichte, Schaffliausen, 1820. 


somewhat closer inspection of their doings, as they everywhere 
offered themselves to view. 

"Were we to judge the Anabaptists by their name alone, we 
should suppose their error to have consisted simply in their 
rejection of infant baptism, and their consequent re-adminis- 
tration of the baptismal sacrament to all who joined their 
comnmnion. These practices, however, constituted but a 
portion of their error ; had they been the only points in which 
they differed from the orthodox Eeformers, the question might 
well have arisen whether some mutual understanding would 
not have been possible. Ay, if we would be honest and 
impartial, we must confess that doubt as to the expediency of 
infant baptism was not, in itself, such a horrible and unheard 
of thing ; ^ for, the effort being once made to trace everything 
back to the Bible, and to allow nothing for which scriptural 
proof could not be adduced, the question must naturally arise 
as to whether the baptism of infants is commanded in the 
Bible. In regard to this query we can at least conceive of 
the occurrence of a theological and exegetical dispute similar 
to that which bore upon the institutive words of the Lord's 
Supper — a dispute which, however, would in no wise have 
necessitated all the extravagances of which the Anabaptists 
were guilty. We can imagine, on the contrary, that doubt 
as to the propriety of infant baptism might be entertained by 
perfectly clear-headed and sober-minded people, to whom it 
might seem more fitting that no one should be admitted to 
the sacrament of baptism until he should possess intelligence 
sufficient to have at least a faint perception of the divine 
mysteries, even though we can never actually comprehend 
them. Much at least might be adduced in favour of such a 
mode of procedure. It might be shown (and it was shown by 
the Anabaptists) that Jesus commissioned His disciples to 
teach the nations (literally, to disciple tliem) and to baptize 
them after they had been instructed. Christ says, further- 

^ Planck, in his Geschichte des protestantischen Lehrhegriffs, vol. iii. pp. 45 
sfpi., judges very discreetly in this matter, as is his custom. 


more, " He who helicveth and is baptized," etc., thus making 
baptism dependent upon faith. Examples might be cited from 
, the Bible to prove that in the ministry of the apostles instruction 
did in reality precede baptism ; and the Anabaptists actually 
cited the case of the treasurer of Queen Candace, whom Philip 
baptized after he had instructed him. In addition to this 
might be adduced the history of the first centuries, in which 
the baptism of catechumens was really delayed until they 
had received regular and sufficient instruction. The testimony 
of noted fathers of the Church, that of Tertullian, for instance, 
might also be quoted as adverse to infant baptism. 

It is true, on the other hand, that much might also be 
brought forward in siipport of the prevalent custom, much 
that really loas urged by the Eeformers. Although it might 
be impossible to prove that children were baptized in the 
apostolic age, it might be shown to be in some degree probable 
that such was the case, mention being frequently made of the 
baptizing of whole families, among the members of which it 
is fair to suppose that some children were comprised. Eefer- 
ence might be had (and this was, manifestly, a more spirituaJ 
demonstration) to the fact that it was concerning children that 
Christ said, " Let the little ones come unto me : for of such is 
the kingdom of heaven." The last-mentioned circumstance 
was, indeed, not a logically exact proof ; for where is it written 
that these children were baptized ? Children might be brought 
to the Saviour by simply inducting them into the doetrines of 
Christianity, and baptizing them afterwards. A certain weight, 
however, still attached to the consideration that children, as 
well as grown people, have a place in the kingdom of God, 
that they have a share in its promises even before their under- 
standing can grasp the significance of them. It was at least 
a beautiful and comfortable thought that the Church, like a 
careful mother, interests herself in the new-born mortal, 
anticipating his wants and providing for him even prior to the 
awakening of his own consciousness. In the physical life, the 
lovincr hands of others must care for us before we are able to 



help ourselves. Why should not — why may not — there be 
a similar spiritual guardianship exercised over the young ? 
And is it not the privilege of the baptized child of the Church, 
"vvhen he has arrived at years of discretion and received 
suitable instruction, freely and consciously to take upon him- 
self the vows that others once made in his name ? In the 
Old Testament (and this fact also was urged by the Eeformers) 
children were received into the covenant of God by circumcision; 
why should not we be at liberty to let baptism take the place 
of circumcision as a covenant sign ? ^ 

Thus we see that the question of the propriety of infant 
baptism admitted of being discussed in a manner far removed 
from all fanaticism. There was surely, however, a fanatical 
obstinacy and exaggeration in the mere fact that, on account 
of a difference of opinion in regard to this matter, men would 
renounce all church fellowship with others, and in no wise 
suffer themselves to be prevailed upon to submit to a custom 
which at least is not condemned in the Bible, and which, when 
correctly apprehended and explained, contains nought of an 
anti-Christian nature. The main thing, after all, is not the 
letter of the institution, but the spirit and significance thereof. 
The circumstances of the Church had undergone an important 
change since the apostolic age. Becoming a Christian was 
then purely a matter of personal choice, there being as yet no 
publicly-recognised Church ; and thus the reception of baptism 
could be left to the option of every individual. But since 
Christianity had become the Church of the people, since every 
person, simultaneously with his entrance into the world, was 
regarded as also a member of the Church, — an external member 
thereof, at the least, — things were different, and it was an 
evidence of a stubborn and intolerant spirit to refuse sub- 
mission to this altered condition of affiiirs, even when the 
internal import of the matter in disj)ute suffered no detriment 

^ This does not make it necessary to regard circumcision as itself a sacrament 
or even as a distinct type of tlie sacrament of baptism. The reformed theologians 
went too far in this direction. 


therefrom. Had, moreover, the Anabaptists confined them- 
selves to a quiet and modest presentation of the grounds which 
they believed themselves able to bring forward against the use 
of infant baptism, some expedient could easily have been 
found, in the Eeformed Church at least, which would have 
given satisfaction to both parties ; for even then, the Govern- 
ment of Zurich, in compliance, most probably, with Zwingle's 
advice, left it to the option of all to defer the baptism of their 
children until they had attained their eighth year, not insisting 
obstinately upon the baptism of new-born infants.'^ (Luther, 
who was a more rigid stickler than Zwingle for the preserva- 
tion of ancient usage in everything pertaining to the doctrine 
of the sacraments, would perhaps have been less inclined to 
such concessions.) The Anabaptists, however, were not 
satisfied with a presentation of their arguments ; they pro- 
ceeded to the adoption of active measures — they baptized for 
the second time those who had already been baptized, thus 
declaring that they regarded the baptism administered by the 
Church as spurious and false. In so doing, they attached 
themselves to the error of earlier sects (the Donatists and 
Novatians), that likewise re-baptized such as went over to 
them, and thereby defiantly dissolved all fellowship with the 
Church Catholic. It is in this respect that the principle of 
the Anabaptists is most distinctly contra-distinguished from 
that of the Eeformers. The Eeformers, also, regarded the 
Church in which they lived as corrupted, but not as funda- 
mentally corrupt ; it was their desire and endeavour to cleanse 
the Church from its abuses, and not to substitute a new 
Church for the old one. N"or did they wish, at the outset, to 
separate themselves from the Church as hitherto existent ; it 
was not till that Church obstinately set its face against all 
attempts at reformation that they finally adandoned the great 
ship and took refuge in a boat. Even then, however, they 
recognised a certain bond of union between themselves and 

^ HoTTiNGER, Forts, vou Joh. V. Midler, vol. vii. p. 32 (after a mandate 
of I7tli Jan. 1525). 


the mother Church. Baptism, the symbol of fellowship, 
continued to be the same for both ecclesiastical parties, and to 
the present day is mutually respected. And in this conserva- 
tion of a common symbol and a common historical basis with 
the old Church, there is much that we often too slightly 
consider. Not so the Anabaptists. For them, all things 
must become new. The Church, they declared, was neither 
here nor there. The visible must pass away. Not in temples, 
but everywhere, in the forest and on the mountains, God 
might be worshipped. The Anabaptists, furthermore, as true 
sectarians and separatists, despised not only the regular, 
systematic, and public worship of God, but also the office of 
the ministry and theological science ; and whilst, on the one 
hand, they declared war on the letter, on the other hand they 
most absurdly adhered to it, burning bibles and books of 
devotion because of the declaration that the letter killeth. 
Thus they actually thought to expel the letter by the letter, as 
is invariably the case with fanatics, who cleave to the dark 

side of the letter and shut their eyes to its clear affirmations. 
Thus abandoning themselves, in their religious investigations, 

to an obscure, or rather to a heated imagination, nourished by 
the figurative passages of Holy Writ, and furthermore re- 
garding their own dreams as revelations and inspirations of the 
Holy Spirit, they chanced upon the strangest tenets and 
vagaries. In political as well as in ecclesiastical concerns, 
they were regulated by no rules, and cherished the most 
indefinite and impracticable of aims. They held that no 
Christian should occupy the position of a magistrate. The 
mafTistratic office tliey regarded as a heathenish institution, a 
curtailer of Christian liberty ; to take the oaths of fealty to 
the established powers was, according to their conception, 
equally wrong with any ordinary swearing. They were also 
opposed to military service and the bearing of arms ; and even 
in social life, in the clothing which they wore and in their 
external behaviour, they presented a singular appearance. A 
community of goods was one of their favourite ideas, and one 


which induced many from among the masses to espouse their 
cause. They also, in harmony witli their spirituo-carnal 
sentiments, introduced the most mischievous disorders into 
the marriage relation. In point of fact, they were the authors 
of phenomena precisely similar to those which appeared 
among the enthusiasts of the first centuries, and which have 
arisen, under various modifications, extending down to the 
communion of the present day, in the ages since the Eefornia- 
tion. Let us illustrate some of their errors by the citation of 

a few facts. „ 

One poor woman (it is related by a contemporary) ^ at the 
bidding of the angel Gabriel invited all her neighbours to a 
feast. The table being set and the company assembled at the 
appointed hour, the woman began to pray with all her might, 
and comforted the guests, who as yet saw no preparation for 
the meal, with the assurance that the angels would bring 
them food, as the Lord fed Israel of old with manna. But 
the company, after waiting with hungry maws until a j 
late hour in the evening, separated undeceived and dis- : 

As this woman apprehended the promise of the Lord, " Ask 
and it shall be given unto you," in a literal sense, so by others 
the admonition to hccome like little children was likewise taken 
in a literal signification. Some of the Anabaptists might be 
seen in the street skipping and clapping their hands, while 
others would join in a dance, or, seating themselves on the 
ground, engage in some game, or roll and tumble with each 
other in the dust. Still others dandled dolls, or dragged fir 
■ cones, strung together on a thread, along the ground after theni.^ 
One Anabaptist sat for a long time on the bank of the Ehine, 
building little heaps of sand, and then, taking water from 
the stream in the hollow of his hand, let it trickle through 
the sand-heaps. When asked what he was doing, he replied 
that he was trying to obey his Saviour's command to 
become like a little child, since, manifestly, nothing could 

1 GaST, I.e. ^ HOTTINGKU, l.C. 


be more childish than this attempt to exhaust the river 

Well would it have been, however, if the Anabaptists had 
been guilty of nothing worse than these ludicrous performances, 
melancholy though they were when considered in respect of 
their source. But religious delusion, which frequently 
mounted into convulsive frenzy (the so-called testifying and 
dying), took here and there a more dangerous turn. That 
many concealed the most sinful lusts of the flesh behind a 
super-spiritual mask, we have already stated. Yet even this 
was not all. A religious tendency that had taken leave of 
reason, and stifled every nobler human sentiment of admiration 
for the good and beautiful as a supposed remnant of the old 
Adam, led also to the commission of the most horrible murder. 

In a lonely farm-house in the neighbourhood of St. Gall, 
where the number of the Anabaptists had increased to eight 
hundred, Hans Schucker, a man of eighty winters, dwelt with 
his numerous family. All were zealous sectarists ; much 
folly had already been preached in their circle, and all manner 
of extravagances had been practised. On a certain day (8th 
February 1526), a younger brother, called Leonard, addressed 
Thomas, his senior, with the following words : " It is the 
will of the heavenly Father that thou shouldst strike my 
head off." In the presence of the brothers and sisters of the 
pair, Thomas besought God that he might receive a will for 
the work, but was not sensible of any answer to his prayer. 
The two then exclaimed, " Thy will, Father, be done ! " 
Leonard kneeled down, Thomas seized a sword, and in an 
instant the head of his murdered brother fell at his feet. 
After the commission of this deed, he took his lute and praised 
God for the success of the work. He then delivered himself 
up to justice, but obstinately persisted in affirming that not 
he, but the Father through him, had done the deed.^ 

• Gast, I.e. 

* Comp. FiiANZ, Schwdrmerische Scenen der Si. Galler WiederUiii/erzu Anfanrj 
der Rfiformatlon, Ebuat, 1821 


Various were the expedients resorted to against these 
fanatics. They were at first treated with clemency, and the 
effort was made to instruct them ; but this mode of procedure 
having no effect upon their obdurate minds, violent measures 
were essayed. Zwingle and his associates not only defended 
the propriety of infant baptism in several writings, but public 
discussions of religion were instituted, in which tlie Ana- 
baptists bore a part. The first of these discussions began at 
Zurich, 1 7th January 1525, and lasted for three days. Zwingle, 
Leo Juda, and Henry Grossmann replied with earnestness and 
dignity to the coarse or subtile questions of their opponents ; 
but the latter were incorrigible. " They were," BuUinger says, 
" of a bitter and stony spirit, and would receive no instruc- 
tion." Zwingle calls them " refractory blockheads " [^Letzhopfe]. 
The consequence was that the civil authorities issued a 
mandate in favour of infant baptism, making banishment and 
heavy fines the penalty of non-compliance with the decree. 
On the 20th of March a second discussion, to which still 
greater publicity attached, was held in the great minster. 
As the Anabaptists still manifested no symptoms of yielding, 
recourse w^as had to harsher measures. (" Since," says BuUinger, 
" kindness was of no avail with them, TOFy were put into the 
high tower in the lower toAvn, the one called the "Witches' 
or New Tower. There were fourteen men and seven women 
of them. There they were fed on bread and water, to see 
whether it was possible to turn them from their error." The 
threat of drowning was even administered, in barbarous iron;^ 
for " he who dips," it was declared, " shall himself be dipped.<^ 
The prisoners remained in durance until the middle of Len 
(8th April), when they succeeded in making their escape, 
aided, as they reported, by an angel. The greater part of 
them repaired to the province of Griiningen. Grebel fled to 
Schaffliausen, where he joined his friend Sebastian Hof- 
meister, whom he vainly hoped to win over to the cause of 
his sect. 

Grebel found a more favourable soil for his principles at 
VOL. II. c 


St. Gall, where Anabaptism had already taken deep root. On 
Palm Sunday (9th April) a whole troop of the people of St. 
Gall, with Grebel at their head, proceeded to the Sitter for 
the purpose of receiving baptismX 

In Basel also, Q^colampadius -instituted various discussions 
with the Anabaptists. He having first endeavoured, at his 
residence,^ in August 1525, to disabuse them of their errors, 
religious discussions were held two years afterwards in St. 
Martin's Church, and, after the lapse of two years more, in 
the town hall ; similar steps were taken in the surrounding 
country, but without avail. And yet Q^colampadius spared 
no pains in the endeavour to convince the misguided people 
of their error ; he patiently condescended to the weak appre- 
hension of the majority, sustained the rudest insults with 
invincible forbearance, and exposed his own person to mortal 
peril. Even persons whom he thought he had reformed, and in 
whose behalf he had besought the indulgence of the Govern- 
ment, turned against him after they had been released from 
punishment, and caused him to feel their hatred. In a word, 
the fanatical furor appeared to be incurable ; it must needs, 
like a fever, run its time before it could abate. This time, 
however, was not accorded it ; it was resolved that caustic 
remedies should extirpate the evil which refused to yield to 
the word of instruction. At Zurich, November 1525, a third 
disputation was called, and assembled at first in the town 
hall, and afterwards — that building not affording a sufficiency 
of room — in the church. Like the other discussions, it ended 
fruitlessly. Grebel, Manz, Blaurock, and others of their faith 
were again summoned before the council, and admonished to 
return from the errors of their ways. All measures proving 
unavailing, the authorities lost all patience, and the oft- 
threatened penalties were put into execution. Felix Manz 
was drowned. He died with composure, uttering the words, 
" Father, into Thy , hands I commend my spirit ! " whereat 

' Not at first, as is usually stated, in St. Martin's Church. See Herzog, 


many were indignant.^ Blaurock was beaten with rods, and, 
on being banished from the city, shook " his bkie frock [blauen 
BocJc] and his shoes against the town of Zurich."^ He escaped 
to the Tyrol, where he ended his days on the scaffold. Most 
of ,the remaining Anabaptists met with a similar fate. Kriisi 
of Appenzell was apprehended in Schwytz, taken to Lucerne, 
and condemned to the flames. 

There is one man who, rising as he does from the great 
mass of the Anabaptists as a more noble personality, deserves 
that we should devote some attention to him, and to the dis- 
cussions which arose between him and Zwiugle on the subject 
of baptism in general, and infant baptism in particular — we 
refer to Balthasar Hubmaier,^ whom we have already cursorily 

Hubmaier was born about the year 1480, at Friedberfj, near 
Augsburg, and, from his birthplace, occasionally appears 
under the name of Friedberger (Pacimontanus). He studied 
at Ingolstadt, and was at first an enthusiastic pupil of Eck, 
whom he extolled in a poem. He then received an appoint- 
ment at the cathedral of • Eegensburg. Here he manifested 
his zeal by persecuting the Jews. He prevailed upon the 
magistrate of Eegensburg to banish them from the city. Upon 
the site of their synagogue a chapel was erected in honour of 
" Mary the Fair," and to this place numerous pilgrimages were 
performed ; it even became the scene of wondrous cures and 
pious frenzies. Hitherto Hubmaier had been a decided, 
nay, more, a fanatical Catholic. At this time, however, 
after perusing the writings of the Reformers, he became an 
equally decided, and soon a fanatical Protestant. He was 
compelled to leave Eegensburg on account of the freedom with 

1 See BULLINGER, vol. i. pp. 294 sqq. and 381 sqq. : ist stijff uf sinem Kyh 
heharret bis an sin End. 

^ BULLINGER, p. 382. 

* He is also called Hiibmor and Hubmaier. Comp. H. Schreiber, Balthasar 
Hubmaier, Stifterder Wiedertaufer, au/dem Schioarzwald, in the Hist. Taschen- 
bmh fur Siiddentschland, 1839-40 ; and CuNiTZ in Herzog's Bealenc. vol. vi. 
pp. 298 sqq. 


^vhicll he expressed his sentiments. At an earlier period he 
had earned his bread as a teacher at Schaffhausen, and thither 
it was that he now again resorted in the same capacity, 
remaining there until called, about 1522, to the pastorate of 
AValdshut. Here he made the acquaintance of Zwingle, and 
was at first an evangelical preacher. In the year 1523, 
while on a journey, he preached at St. Gall to a large con- 
course of people. How much influence Miinzer may have had 
upon him it is difficult to determine. Bullinger assumes 
that he was influenced by him to some extent. He describes 
Friedberg as an eloquent and well-read man, but says that 
he had " an inconstant mind that swayed him hither and 
thither."^ He also states that after the commencement of 
Hubmaier's intercourse with Miinzer, " who prated much about 
the redemption of Israel," he became entirely changed. In the 
beginning of the year 1525, Hubmaier appeared as an opponent 
of infant baptism. He first broached his scruples relative to 
the subject to CEcolampadius, who vainly strove, in a written 
refutation of his arguments, to disabuse him of his errors. 
The passage, " Suffer little children to come unto me," cited 
(though very precariously) in favour of infant baptism, Hub- 
maier explained as signifying that children should certainly 
be presented to the Lord ; not, however, by baptizing them, 
but by pronouncing the blessing of the Church upon them 
and praying over them. Such was his own mode of procedure 
at Waldshut. It was only when parents were urgent in 
demanding that their children should be baptized that he 
complied with the traditional usage. In May 1525, Zwingle 
published his important work, " On Baptism, Anabaptism, 
and Infant Baptism" [Von dcm Touff, clem Widcrtouff, und 
dem KindertouffY In this he proceeded from the premise 
that nothing whatever of an external and elementary nature 
is able to purify the soul ; the grace of God alone is sufficient 

^ Vadianus also describes him as eloquoitissimum sane et humanissimum 
viriim, but accuses liim of a rage for innovation. 
^ Werke, vol. ii. pp. 230 sfjq. 


for that. Baptism, consequently, cannot wash away sin. It 
is merely a " sign of allegiance " on the 'part of God's people, 
similar to the covenant siofn of circumcision in the case of the 
people of Israel. Eesistance to infant baptism consequently 
seemed to him to be resistance to the ordinances of God, 

Hubmaier replied- to this treatise of Zwingle's by another 
treatise.^ Baptism was to him something more than a simple 
sign of allegiance. Christian baptism appeared to him to be 
contra-distinguished from the baptism of John by the fact that 
it was not, like the latter, a baptism unto repentance, but a 
baptism unto the forgiveness of sins. He therefore, like 
Luther, beheld in baptism an act whereby an actual boon of 
salvation is communicated to the person baptized. He differed 
from Luther, however, in denying that such a boon is com- 
municated to unconscious children, who have no understanding 
of the matter, and from whom no faith is to be expected. 
" If it be said," he continued, " that baptism presupposes the 
future faith of the children baptized, the administration of the 
sacrament on such an assumption is like hanging out a [cask] 
hoop (a public-house sign) ^ at Easter, in anticipation of the 
wine that will not be barrelled until the next autumn, and of 
which no one knows whether it will not be destroyed before- 
hand by hail, frost, or some other calamity." To baptize 
unreasoning children seemed to him not a whit better than 
baptizing dogs and monkeys. Should it be alleged, however, 
that infant baptism is nowhere forbidden in the Holy Scrip- 
tures (even though it be not expressly commanded), then the 
reading of mass and a thousand other abuses that are 
also not expressly forbidden might be allowed with equal 

Zwingle, who, though nowhere directly mentioned in Bal- 
thasar's production, was nevertheless covertly attacked,^ failed 

' Von dem christUchen Touff der Oliiuhigen. 

" [In Germany a hoop is frequently suspended at the entrance of taverns, as an 
indication of the cheer that is to be found within.— Tr.] 

3 Balt-hasar, for instance, had spoken of ZiliKjlern {babblers, literally 
tovguers], in allusion to Zwingle's name. 


not to indite a reply. In answer/ he accused his opponent 
of confounding water baptism with the baptism of the Spirit, 
thus relapsing into the Popish creed. He continued to main- 
tain that water baptism is an external thing, a covenant sign, 
and nothing more. That, furthermore, infant baptism was not 
a Papal institution, as the Anabaptists affirmed, but that 
Origen designates it as of apostolic transmission, was, together 
with other items, demonstrated with historic solidity. 

The disputants were by no means lacking in passionateness 
of tone. While Hubmaier called the vindicators of infant 
baptism " baby- washers," Zwingle termed the adherents of 
Hubmaier "journeymen bathers." But the worst feature of 
the controversy was that Hubmaier's conduct therein deprived 
Waldshut of the blessing of the Eeformation. The town was 
in danger of falling into the hands of Austria. The Evan- 
gelical states, which might have protected it, abandoned it to 
its fate, because it would not give up its preacher, whose 
banishment from Waldshut had been required. The town 
was therefore obliged to surrender at discretion, on the 6 th of 
December 1525. Hubmaier took refuge at Zurich, in the 
house of a widow who was an adherent of his sect. The 
council of the city, however, drew him forth from his con- 
cealment and cast him into prison. An oral disputation 
ensued between him and Zwingle, and he finally made a 
public recantation on the 6th of April 1526. His further 
fortunes and his end are lamentable. An unsettled and 
fugitive wanderer, he visited Bavaria, Austria, and Moravia. 
At Nikolsburg he gathered an Anabaptist congregation around 
him ; he was also constantly active as a writer. When, 
however, on the death of Lewis of Hungary, the province of 
Moravia fell to King Ferdinand, religious tolerance was at an 
end. Hubmaier was taken prisoner in 1527, together with 
his wife, who had accompanied him in his wanderings, and 
conducted to Vienna, near to which city, in the castle of 

' Ueher Dr. Balthasar's Taufhuchlln, Zw'mylis Wcrke, vol. ii. chap. i. pp. 
337 sqq. 


Greifenstein, he awaited his further destiny. He was con- 
demned to death as an instigator of disturbances at Waldshut, 
and among the peasants, and on the 10th of March 1528 
ended his days at the stake with the constancy of a martyr. 
Three days later his faithful wife was drowned in the Danube. 

In 1527 the Swiss states of Zurich, Bern, and St. Gall 
published a decree against the Anabaptists, threatening them 
with the severest corporal and capital punishments. In view 
of such edicts, it is with double pleasure that we recall the 
words of Luther, who said that " heresy (sectarianism, etc.) can 
neither be cut in pieces by the sword, nor consumed in the 
flames, nor drowned in the floods," but that the word of truth 
alone must be confided in for its destruction. In apology for 
the harsh measures of the Swiss governments, it may be stated 
only that the outbreaks of religious enthusiasm frequently led 
to crimes, instances of which we have given, and that every- 
thing that menaced the Church was regarded and condemned 
as perilous also to the State. 

Let us now return to the progress of the Eeformation in 

In the beginning of the year 1526, the two religious parties 
in the Grisons measured their strength against each other at 
the disputation of Ilanz, on the festival of the Three Kings (6th 
January [Epiphany]). The adherents of the old faith, the Abbot 
of St. Lucien, Theodore Schlegel, and three deans, together with 
a few capitulars and monks, had accused the Eeformer Co- 
mander and his adherents before the governors of the Grisons. 
The latter instituted a religious conference. Two men were 
appointed from each of the three leagues, to whom the conduct 
of the disputation was entrusted. A number of theses against 
oral confession, the prohibition of meats, the abuse of spiritual 
authority, against images and the mass, and also against the 
apprehension of the doctrine of the Lord's Supper in the 
Lutheran sense, formed the starting-point of the discussion.^ 

The course of this disputation is described with great na'iveU 

1 See BuLLiXGER, vol. i. p. 315. 


by BuUinger. The Episcopal vicar of Clmr and the Abbot of 
St. Liicien exerted themselves for its frustration, entrenching 
themselves behind the dietetic question, amongst other points. 
To their arguments relative to the above-mentioned subject, a 
poor parson (the pastor of Bratz) replied that the bishop and 
his vicar had no need to complain on the score of victuals ; 
" Let us poor under-sheplierds complain," he said. Master 
Thommeli, the pastor of Diinzen, thouglit that the Greek 
language was a public calamity ; had not the Hebrew and 
Greek come into the land, so many disturbances and heresies 
would never have arisen. It was at first decided to admit no 
strangers as guests at the disputation. It was only after 
some lengthy discussions that access was granted them, and 
then they were obliged to be silent. The admitted guests 
were Sebastian Hofmeister of Schaffhausen, who afterwards 
published an account of the proceedings of the conference,^ 
and Jacob Ammann of Zurich. Amongst other things the 
passage, " Thou art the rock " [av el Tlerpo^;, etc., Matt. xvi. 
18], was discussed. This rock on which the Church is said 
to rest, was by some thought to be Peter, and by others to be 
Christ. The governors of the Grisons soon became weary of 
the theological wrangling, and, in the afternoon session, urged 
for a termination of the dispute : " For half a day they (the 
disputants) had had each other by the ears about one solitary 
article ; henceforth they should be more discreet and skilful, 
or the governors of the leagues would leave their seats and no 
longer listen." Notwithstanding this protest the conference 
was continued; indeed, purgatory and the sacraments were 
discussed with more vigour than ever. The Abbot of St. 
Lucien defended the doctrine of purgatory, on the ground that 
there must be degrees of blessedness, for Christ spoke of 
many mansions (John xiv.). He discoursed so long on the 
sacrament that the opposite party had no opj^wrtunity to speak, 
and nothing remained for Comander but to enter a protest 
previous to the dissolution of the session. On the other hand, 

' Halleii, Schweizerhihl. vol. iii. p. 212. 


he continued to preach the gospel in Chur with all earnest- 
ness, and in this way caused the mass to be abolished and the 
gospel to prevail in most of the Grisons towns. Immediately 
after the disputation seven priests renounced the mass ; and 
one and another of those who were present at Ilanz may 
have carried home with them into their remote pastoral 
hamlets good seed, which was afterwards to spring up and 
bear fruit. 

Of greater importance for the fortunes of the Eeformation 
in Switzerland was the religious conference which took place 
in the town of Baden, in what is now the canton of Aargau. 
The county of Baden and the free bailiwicks were then under 
the common jurisdiction of the cantons of Zurich, Lucerne, 
Schwytz, Unterwalden, Zug, and Glarus. Dr. Eck, the " land 
disputant " (as BuUinger calls him), had long been considering 
how he might repair the notch which had been made in his 
sword in the tournament at Leipsic. In the year 1524 he 
despatched a letter to the confederates, proposing that he 
should dispute with Zwingle. This proposal led, first, to a 
written controversy between Zwingle and Eck. Zwingle 
accused his antagonist of atheism; for he who does not 
believe God's word denies His essence, he declared. He 
compared him to a bad physician, who tries to heal wounds 
in the head by applying a plaster to the knee, etc. Zwingle 
himself, however, grew weary of this species of polemical 
discussion, and desisted therefrom. The mutual abuse and 
recrimination of the two parties led to nothing good, he 
affirmed, and were no better than the bickerings of a couple 
of angry women. And, indeed, there was no lack of quarrel- 
some individuals. Besides Eck and Faber, a third combatant 
appears in the camp of the opponents of the Eeformation 

one who played but a subordinate part at the Baden 

disputation itself, but whose sentiments w^ere afterwards dis- 
played more boldly in opprobrious tractates, similar to some 
which he had formerly directed against Luther — we refer to 
Murner, a Franciscan monk. He was born at Strassburg 


(14th December 1475), and distinguished himself at various 
Universities, — at Freiburg in Breisgau, at Cracow, at Basel, 
and in Strassburg itself, as a man of sprightly intellect and 
satirical power. Previous to the Eeformation (in 1512) he 
delivered at Fraukfort-on-the-Main a series of sermons, modelled 
upon those of Geiler of Kaisersberg. The JYarrenheschwunong 
and the Schehnenzunft were the issue of these sermons. At 
this time Murner stood on the side of those who censured 
the weaknesses and defects of the clerical body. In his 
Gouchmatt (Basel, 1519) he depicted the luxurious and effemi- 
nate behaviour of the men of his time. He was no friend to 
the Eeformation of Luther, although he admitted the justice 
of individual features of it, and we find him only too soon on 
the side of Eck, Emser, and Cochlseus. He wrote several 
opprobrious tractates against Luther ; amongst them the 
satirical poem, Vo77i grosscn lutherischen Narren, was especially 
remarkable for its coarseness.^ At the time of the disputation 
of Baden, Murner was a lecturer and professor of theology at 
Lucerne. From the pulpit he inveighed against Zwingle, 
announcing to the people his intention of putting him to 
confusion at the conference at Baden.^ To Eck's theses, 
which we are just about to consider, he added two — one in 
favour of the doctrine of transubstantiation, and the other in 
opposition to the secularization of the property of the Church. 
Neither of them, however, was discussed. 

The theses of Eck, which were to form the basis of the 
disputation, were as follows: — 1. The true body and blood 
of Christ are present in the sacrament of the altar; 2. 
They are veritably offered, in the service of the mass, for the 
living and the dead ; 3. Mary and the saints are to be 
invoked as intercessors ; 4. The images of the Lord Jesus 
and of the saints should not be abolished ; 5. There is a 

^ A new edition of this was puLlished by Henry Kurtz, at Zurich, 1848. 
His coarseness brought him the ambiguous fame of a Luihergeissel 
{Luther omastix). 

2 Epp. ZwinfjUi, vol. i. p. 284. 


purgatory after this life ; 6. The children of Christians are 
born in original sin ; 7, The baptism of Christ, and not that 
of John, removes original sin. (It was not necessary to 
discuss the last two theses, as they were received by both 

Zwingle replied to the proclamation of the twelve cantons ^ 
[convoking a conference at Baden] by a warning against the 
writings of Eck and Faber, and a petition that he might be 
allowed to designate some other place than Baden as the 
field of combat. This request not being acceded to, he 
declined to assist in person at the conference — a refusal 
which was not only (though with injustice) attributed to 
cowardice by his opponents,^ but was also censured by his 
friends.^ fficolampadius, who had complied with the 
summons to the disputation, and upon whom the brunt of 
the battle now descended, felt himself particularly forsaken, 
with no Zwingle to render him aid.^ All the more powerful, 
however, was the impression which the modest theologian 
of Basel made upon those who were present. It is thus 
that Manuel of Bern speaks of him in his poem on the 
disputation : — 

" Gsell, ich gab' ein Guldin drum, 
Ach, dass du (Ekolampadium 
Zu Baden hattest gesehen, 
Mit so grosser Demiithigkeit, 
Ein Mensch, der gar kein Gallen treyt (tragi), 
Das miissen's selbst verjalien (bekennen). 
Sein Scblussred, die er hat g'lehrt, 
Die bat er ehrlicb erhalten." 

Besides CEcolampadius, who was accompanied by his 
colleagues at Basel, Jacob Immeli, preacher at St. Ulric's, 
and Weissenburger, chaplain of the hospital, there appeared 

' BuLLiNGER, p. 337, and Zumgli's Werke, vol. ii. 2, pp. 424 sqq. 

2 He had, they declared, "by his superfluity of writings and his printed 
books," been the chief cause of the excitement, and now he desired to remain 
in the background. 

5 By (Ecolampadius particularly. See Morikofer, vol. ii. p. 34. 

* Vadianus openly expressed his commiseration of the champion of Basel 
(MOEIKOFEK, ibid.). 


Oil the reformed side, Bertliold Haller of Bern, and Ludwig 
(Eclisli of Schaffhausen. There were present also several 
other scholars of Switzerland and from abroad. Erasmus, 
to whom an invitation had been sent, and who was at that 
time residing at Basel in the house of Frobenius, politely 
excused himself on the plea of ill-health. The disputation 
took place in church. Every morning at five o'clock a 
solemn service was held, succeeded by a sermon half an 
hour in length. A similar practice obtained, as we have 
seen, at the disputation of Leipsic. The matter was re- 
ligiously conducted by both parties ; they were unwilling to 
engage in so decisive a work without iirst beseeching God 
for His blessing. The clergy, among whom there were many 
from whose shoulders costly draperies Howed, marched in 
solemn procession to the Church. The discussion began on 
the 21st of May, and lasted for eighteen days. Each party 
was permitted to choose two clerks ; and over each clerk an 
inspector was appointed, who controlled the protocol. All 
others were forbidden, on pain of death, to write down anything 
that was said. Notwithstanding this prohibition, Thomas 
von Hofen, a citizen of Bern, secretly took notes which were 
afterwards printed at Strassburg. It is also narrated of a 
young man from Valais (Thomas Plater, incontestably) that 
immediately after the sessions he proceeded to the baths, and 
there wrote down from memory all that had occurred. It was 
this same Plater who, in the disguise of a vendor of chickens, 
discharged the office of messenger between G^colampadius 
and Zwingle. On more than one occasion he knocked up 
the latter in the night, in order that he might give him the 

The disputation was presided over by Abbot Barnabas of 
Engelberg, Knight Jacob Stapfer, Magistrate Hans Honegger 
of Bremgarten, and Dr. Ludwig Beer of Basel, an adherent 
of the Catholic doctrine, but a man of great moderation and 
a friend of Erasmus. According to the testimony of con- 
temporaries. Dr. Beer was also the only member of the 


Catholic party who retained his dignity and composure, and 
did not suffer himself to be carried away by passion.^ 

(Ecolampadius, who, as we are aware from his previous 
history, had no fondness for disputations, here developed rare 
talent. He was the principal opponent of Dr. Eck, of dis- 
putatious fame, in discussing the doctrines of the Lord's Supper, 
the invocation of saints, purgatory, and the use of images. 
Eck occupied a magnificently -appointed pulpit, while his 
adversary had to content himself with a simple desk. The 
latter, however, impressed all his hearers by his intellect, so 
that one of the adherents of the papistical party could not 
refrain from exclaiming, " Would that the long yellow man 
were on our side ! " CEcolampadius likewise gained the respect 
of all who observed him off the arena of disputation. 
Whilst the combatants of the papistical party enjoyed them- 
selves in carousals, for which the Abbot of Wittengen was 
obliged to furnish the wine (Eck was said to hatlie in wine 
instead of water at Baden),^ CEcolampadius quietly withdrew 
to his chamber, where he passed his time in study and 
prayer. So discreet was his behaviour, that the landlord of 
the Hecht inn, with whom he was lodging, and who re- 
garded him as a heretic, declared that he must at all events 
be a pious man. Of the discussion itself we will present one 
characteristic feature.^ CEcolampadius made use of a singular 
illustration to demonstrate the inadmissibility of the worship 
of the saints. If, said he, a man were to ask me the way 
from Baden to Basel, I should not direct him to go through 
Bern and Solothurn, but would point out to him the direct 
way. In the same manner, when we wish to go to God, we 
ought not to make the circuit of all the saints. Eck, how- 

1 Bullinger complains of the partiality of the presidents. He says that when 
an oath, such as Botz Marter, occasionally escaped Eck, the presidents let it 
pass ; when, however, the disputants on the other side essayed to talk more 
freely, the presidents "reprimanded them immediately [so was man ihnen v/ 
der Huheii] and commanded them to behave discreetly." 

- Feanz, in his Leben Thomas Platers, after Bullinger. 

3 See HoTTiNGER, Fo7-ts. von Joh. v. Midler, vol. vii. pp. 92 sqq. On the 
further course of the discussion, see Herzog's (Ekolampad. vol. ii. 


ever, skilfully turned this illustration to his own advantage. 
Certainly, said he, if a man wished to go from here to Basel, 
I should not send him through Bern and Solothurn ; but I 
must direct him to Bragg and Eheinfelden, nor can he avoid 
those places if he woidd take the shortest road. Thus the 
Catholic Church did actually regard the saints as mediate 
personages, not as remote and collateral characters ; and 
OEcolampadius was himself constrained to admit that he 
had made choice of a bad illustration. This incident will, 
however, show the snares in which men become entangled 
when they attempt to treat subjects of a metaphysical and 
supersensuous nature in too popular a style. Such discussion 
offers a boundless field for the display of wit — wit of a 
species in which the Protestants, unskilled in subterfuge, were 
frequently overpowered by the wily and dexterous Catholics, 
for the reason that the latter did not enter into any subject, 
and couched all their arguments in an ad Jwminem form. 
"When, on the other hand, the Eeformers planted their 
feet on the platform of Scripture and refused to be driven 
thence, they were sure of victory, even though their adver- 
saries might not acknowledge it to be theirs. Hence 
OEcolampadius was right in speedily quitting the slippery 
ground of witty similitudes and withdrawing from the dis- 
putation with the simple declaration : " / commend the matter 
to the Seripticres." And it was from the approval of the 
Scriptures that himself and his friends had need to derive 
consolation in view of the issue of the debate. After Thomas 
Murner had, as a parting satisfaction, vented his spleen 
against the absent Zwingle in a violent oration,^ the dis- 
cussion was declared to be ended, and all present were 
commanded to indicate in writing the party to which they 
intended henceforth to adhere. The majority (for many of 

' He called liiin a tyrant, and styled his adlierents infamous liars and per- 
jurers, criminal, faithless, disgraceful persons, thieves, church robbers, gallows 
birds, and declared that every honest man would blush to associate with them, 


the Evangelicals, amongst them Berthokl Haller, had pre- 
viously taken their departure) decided in favour of the old 
faith, Zwingle and QEcolampadius were excommunicated, and 
Basel was requested to deprive the latter of his office as 
preacher, and to banish him from the country ; which 
demand, however, was not complied with. On the contrary, 
(Ecolampadius was received with great joy upon his return 
to Basel. But to Zwingle he wrote : " Let us pray Christ 
not to forsake His people, and to tread Satan under His feet 

The loudest jubilation on the side of the Eomanists issued 
from Thomas Murner. He it was who published the pro- 
ceedings of the debate. That he falsified them, as he has 
long been accused of doing, cannot be proved. He was 
doubtless, however, blinded by passion, and thus prevented 
from doing justice to the adverse party in his criticism of 
the persons who composed it. Soon after the disputation he 
gave free course to his embitterment in his Kirchendieh und 
Kctzcrkalender [" Calendar of Church Thieves and Heretics "], 
published in the year 1527. In this production he hurled 
the coarsest abuse upon the heads of Zwingle, CEcolampadius, 
and most of the other Eeformers,^ but at the same time 
erected an uncomely monument to himself. 

^ One of the Evangelical party, Dr. John Kopp, liad published an evangelical 
calendar, in which biblical names and events were substituted for the names 
of the saints. As a parody on this, Murner 's calendar appeared, with the 
names of heretics instead of the saints' names, and with satirical cuts in place 
of the figures of the zodiac. Amongst other things, Zwingle is called a 
" church thief " (his picture appears on the gallows), "a fiddler of the Holy 
Gospel, and a lutist of the Old and New Testaments." CEcolampadius is styled 
a Nihlaus Bader, a Leck-uns-im-Bad. Leo Juda is termed "an evangelical 
bag-piper of the New Testament," and so on. Comp. Kessler's Sabbata, and 
E. GoTZiNGEK, Zwei Kalender vom Jahre 1527, Schafflmusen, 1865. 









THE results of the disputation at Baden were at first 
anything but encouraging for the progress of the Eefor- 
mation. While the disputants were still in session, it was 
rumoured that Qj^colampadius had succumbed to the powerful 
Eck, and recanted.-^ After the close of the discussion, he was 
reported to have been completely vanquished. " Nay!" retorted 
the opponents of Eck, " Gi^colampadius yielded not to force 
of logic, but to superiority of lungs." In Bern there was 
manifested a discontented feeling, which called forth a reaction. 
During the continuance of the discussion at Baden, on Whit- 
Monday of 1526, a meeting was held in the minster of Bern, 
at which deputies from the seven Catholic cantons appeared. 
Though James von Mai and other burghers of the town 
declared their readiness to stand by the word of God and not 
to suffer themselves to be misled by the vociferations of Eck, 
Faber, and Murner, the majority were on the side of those 
who determined to abide by the ancient faith and the laudable 

^ According to a letter written by Comander to Zwinglc (Opj). vii. p. 514). 
Conip. the author's (Ecolawpad. p. 96, note. 


old customs. " There was," says BuUinger, "great jubilation by- 
reason of this decision, which, however, was but of brief 
standing." An attempt was made to constrain Haller to read 
mass again. He stedfastly refused to comply with this 
demand, and continued to preach the gospel " as meekly as he 
could." ^ In Zurich, also, reactionary longings made themselves 
felt. Some of the canons declined to attend upon the Scripture 
lections introduced by Zwingle. The Government, however, 
threatened to punish such delinquents by depriving them of 
so many quarters of corn in return for a corresponding number 
of absences. In the seven Catholic cantons especially, a 
spirit of defiance was observable.^ These cantons demanded 
that Basel, St. Gall, and Mlihlhausen should send away their 
Protestant preacher, and threatened a breach of the peace in 
case of non-compliance with this requisition. 

Amid all these darkenings of the horizon, Zwingle calmly 
pursued the even tenor of his way in Zurich. He interested 
himself especially in the confirmation and strengthening of the 
inner constitution of the Eeformation. He strove after the 
establishment of a rigorous system of marriage laws which 
should uphold the discipline of the family, and endeavoured 
to secure ecclesiastical order by his system of preachers.'^ 
But above all things, he sought to familiarize the Church with 
the grand ideas of divine legislation as developed in the 
Pentateuch. This portion of the Holy Scriptures formed the 
foundation of the discourses delivered by him at this time. 
His labours as a Eeformer were likewise extended beyond 
Zurich through the medium of epistolary communication. 

^ As BuUinger expresses it. On account of this meekness of behaviour, 
Murner spitefully calls him a "choice keeper of silence in regard to his faith," 
and one who, even at Baden, would have preferred to dispute with the dumb 
than with those who could speak. 

^ " The disputation of Baden and the recent action of the Bernese made the 
seven cantons of the Confederacy so abominably arrogant and insolent, that 
they set themselves up as masters of all the other cities and cantons, and under- 
took to lay down laws for these, and even to enforce compliance with their 

3 For particulars, see Morikofek, vol. ii. pp. 43 sqq. 



A course similar to that of Zwingle at Zurich was pursued 
by (Ecolampadius at Basel, though the position of the latter 
■was rendered more difficult than that of Zwingle by the 
irresolution of the Government of Basel. The civil authorities 
here had, in the year 1525, turned to Erasmus as their oracle, 
and had by Mm been advised to await the action of a general 
council, and in the meantime to see that no scurrilous 
writings were issued on either side, to suffer the continuance 
of the old usages, and in general to strive to avoid all 
collision with the confederate cantons. Erasmus also recom- 
mended, however, that any monks who, in their youth, might 
unwillingly have been constrained to adopt the monastic life, 
should be allowed to forsake their cloisters. 

An event in the history of the Eeformation at Basel, not 
wholly without importance, was the introduction into tlie 
churches, at Easter of the year 1526, of a German version 
of the Psalms, and of singing in German. This innovation 
took place without the permission of the Government, and 
was, in fact, followed by its direct prohibition. Upon this, 
however, (Ecolampadius sent an urgent petition to the autho- 
rities, begging them to reverse their decision, and stating, among 
other things, that the sacred songs sung in the familiar 
language of the people had brought tears to many eyes — 
tears which he likened to the joyful ones shed of yore at the 
rebuilding of Jerusalem (Ezra iii. 12). The Government 
returned no favourable answer to this entreaty. Notwith- 
standing this, however, the subject was brought up again at 
the feast of St. Lawrence (10th August) ; and two days later, 
after some discussion, the council consented to the practice 
of German singing in some few of the churches of the city, 
but continued to forbid it in others.' The Carthusian monk 
George found this singing less edifying, from his standpoint, 
than did the Evangelicals from theirs. He writes as follows 
in his chronicle: — " On the festival of St. Lawrence (10th 

^ Comp. CEcolampadius' Letters to Zwingle, 0pp. vii. pp. 490 and 530, and 
the church archives of Basel. 


August), in St. Martin's Church, the Lutherans, in spite of the 
express remonstrances of the council, commenced the singing 
of psalms done into German verses, after the Strassburg trans- 
lation. These verses were in the style of the common popular 
ballad, and exceedingly rude and unpolished. An attempt 
had previously been made, at Easter-tide, to introduce this 
innovation, but had been promptly suppressed." Soon after 
the introduction of the German psalms, a new church liturgy 
was instituted. (Ecolampadius also drew up a new catechism 
for children — a work that is remarkable for its great evan- 
gelical simplicity and clearness.-^ The catechism begins with 
the question, " Art thou a Christian ? " to which the answer 
is, " Yes, by the grace of God." The main articles that form 
the basis of this catechism are the three contained in Luther's 
Shorter Catechism, and are arranged in the following order : — 
1. The Creed; 2. The Ten Commandments; 3. The Lord's 
Prayer [Das Unser Vater]. 

It formed a part of the ordinary tactics of the opponents 
of Protestantism to fill such pulpits as were under their control 
with preachers whose views were in harmony with their own, 
in order that these men might form a counterpoise to the 
dangerous innovations of the day. Thus an Erasmus Eitter 
had been called to Schaffhausen ; and thus a Heim had been 
summoned to Bern. Thus, also, at this time the cathedral 
chapter of Basel called to the place of Selamonius Limperger, 

^ We cite the following in exemplification of the comprehensible style of this 
catechism in treating of morals : — Question, " How dost thou avoid idleness ? "— 
Answer, " I do what my father and mother command me, and strive myself 
to learn and to accomplish something, in order that I may please them ; I do 
not loiter in the streets." Question, "What sort of companions hast thou ? " — 
Answer, " I avoid all boys who use improper language, who curse and swear, who 
gamble and lie, who do not like to go to church, but are always loafing about the 
streets." Question, "How dost thou behave thyself?" — Answer, "I eat and 
drink what I require, without longing for dainties ; I rise quickly as soon as I 
awake ; I speak when I am spoken to." It is further declared, " Pity dwells in 
the heart alone ; I may use outward things as I need them, seeking also thereby 
to serve my neighbour, without giving offence to any." This system of " In- 
struction for Children " throughout avoids subtile doctrinal questions, thus 
displaying a fine pedagogical sense and tact, such as are not possessed by all 


a favourer of the reformed doctrines, a man named Augustine 
Marius, of Freisingen, a native of Basel, who strove to the 
utmost of his ability to hinder the progress of the Eeformation. 
OEcolampadius at first vainly endeavoured to come to an 
amicable understanding with this person, advancing, in the 
effort, more than half way to meet him. Instead, however, 
of being productive of any good, this course was followed 
by scenes of a mortifying character. Although the council 
had laid a fresh interdict upon pulpit revilings, the discord 
between the two parties increased. The representatives of 
both sides had set before the Government written arguments 
in support of their respective views, but the Government still 
refrained from coming to any decision. A decision seemed at 
length to emanate from heaven, clothed with the authority 
of a divine decree. Public misfortune — pestilence, hail, the 
explosion of the powder magazine near the Malzgasse : a 
disaster occasioned by lightning, and productive of death to 
about forty individuals — gave rise to uncharitable strictures 
on both sides.* Some discerned in these events a punishment 
for sacrilegious innovations, while others read therein an 
earnest admonition to the adherents of the old doctrines to 
turn to the pure gospel. Even on occasions of rejoicing at 
public feasts of the burghers, the religious discord made itself 
perceptible. Some of the guilds that favoured the new 
doctrines invited only (Ecolampadius and those preachers who 
were in agreement with him to be present at their banquets. 
The remaining corporations, on the other hand, organized 
meetings at the Butchers' Chambers, and invited to them none 
but people of their own persuasion. The council, whose 
course, however, altered in the sequel, at length forbade further 
festivities on either side.^ Here and there active hostilities 

' Oomp. the Carthusian chronicle. 

^ HoTTiNGER, Forts, vofi Joh. V. Milller, vii. pp. 112 sqq., and the passages 
there cited from Ocns. The fact that some of the banr^uets of tlie Reformed 
])arty took place in Lent was in itself calculated to embitter the opposite side. 
A remnant of these dissensions may doubtless be found in the custom, still 
prevalent in Basel, of celebrating grand guild feasts on Ash Wednesday. 


were commenced. In the year 1527, CEcolampadius posted 
some theses which he wished to discuss, and a Catholic priest 
tore them down and abused them. Thomas Geierfalk, an 
Augustinian monk and friend of QEcoLampadiuS; in trying to 
rescue the theses, was attacked by the priest and wounded with 
a dagger.^ This and similar scenes, as the council were 
unable to agree upon any mode of action, occasioned an 
extraordinary commotion amongst the burghers. On Tuesday 
the 2 2d October 1527, about four hundred citizens assembled 
in the Augustinian monastery, which had been abandoned by 
the monks, for the purpose of consulting as to the mode of 
putting an end to the differences. They resolved to despatch 
a delegation of thirty honourable men to the magistrates to 
petition them for a decision. But the authorities anticipated 
them. Whilst they were still in session, the chief guildmaster, 
James Mair, appeared, accompanied by two deputies from the 
council,^ charged with an inquiry into the cause of the 
meeting. The burghers declared that they were desirous of 
presenting their case before the council through their own 
representatives, but they were finally persuaded to entrust the 
communication of their wishes to the deputies, who expressed 
the inclination of the Government to accede to all reasonable 
demands on the part of the burghers. Accordingly, on the 
following Sunday, 27th October, all the burghers were recom- 
mended by the council to betake themselves to their respective 
guilds, and were informed that uncalled-for assemblies of a 
mob-like nature were highly displeasing to the Government, 
and were strictly forbidden for the future. It was, however, 
further declared that it was not the intention of the council 
to lay any religious burdens upon the consciences of the 
people ; they would leave it to the option of every individual 
to believe what he conscientiously held to be true and right ; 
but no personal violence must be used on either side, nor was it 
allowable for any one to revile another on account of his faith. 

^ According to others, this took place a year later. 
2 James Gotz the Srdzherr, and Peter Ryff. 


In Bern, also, the will of the people had, during this time, 
been repeatedly manifested ; and this was especially the case 
in the country districts, a few villages having taken the law 
into their own hands and themselves abolished the mass and 
ceremonial of the Eomish Church within their proper limits. 
In view of this condition of affairs, it was proposed that a dis- 
putation should be held, similar to that which had taken 
place six years before at Zurich, the result of which should 
determine the course to be pursued.^ The Bishops of Con- 
stance, Basel, Lausanne, and Valais, whose dioceses extended 
into the precincts of Bern, were summoned to appear at this 
conference or forfeit their prerogatives. Friendly invitations 
to attend were likewise despatched to many other members of 
the Confederation and to numerous foreigners. Eck, who 
could not but be conscious that no such easy victory awaited 
him at Bern as that which he had formerly gained at Baden, 
did not manifest the slightest inclination " to follow the 
heretics into their corners and lurking-places." The five 
cantons refused safe-conducts to those who should resort to 
Bern from them. By the beginning of the year 1528, there 
was an arrival of clerical and lay deputies from several of the 
Swiss cantons, as well as from the bordering countries of 
Swabia and Bavaria. Zurich was the gathering-place for all 
who came from Eastern Switzerland. Guests from Germany 
(Constance, Ulm, Lindau) also made their appearance, and 
joined the assemblage at Zurich. On the 2d of January 
1528 the deputies quitted the above-mentioned city, and pro- 
ceeded, partly on foot and partly on horseback, with Burgo- 
master Eoust at their head, and an escort of three hundred 
soldiers, to the allied city of Bern. This they reached, having 

^ See Fischer, Geschlchie der Disputation zu Bern, Bern, 1828 ; and 
Zwingle's works as published Ly Schuler and Sciiultiiess, Deutsche Schriftcn, 
ii. cliiip. i. pp. 53 sqq. Murner issued another of his abusive productions on this 
occasion. He says : " Herein is set forth the unchristian, outrageous, unlearned, 
and unlawful proclamation and undertaking on the part of the worshipful rulers 
of Bern, of a disputation in their graces' city — a proceeding which is opposed to 
the interests of Christendom and is contrary to the word of God and the gospel 
of Christ," etc. (Lucerne, 1527). Comp. Bullixger, ii. pp. 41.3 sqq. 


travelled by the way of Mellingen and Lenzberg, on the 4th 
of January. BuUinger gives a full account of all who 
attended the disputation. The number of clergy present 
amounted to 350. Several of the guests preached to the 
people in the churches during the days of the disputation ; 
among such were Blarer, Bucer, (Ecolampadius, Comthur 
Schmid, and Caspar Megander.^ But of all who preached, 
Zwingle excited the greatest attention by the two sermons 
which he delivered on the 21st and the 28 th of January. 
The former of these discourses treated on the Apostles' Creed, 
the different articles of which were successively explained. 
Who can blame the preacher for taking occasion, at the same 
time, to vindicate the orthodoxy of his own position, in regard 
to these articles, against the slanders of his opponents ? In 
thus defending himself, he lingered especially over the 
doctrine of the two natures in Christ, and also over that of 
Christ's bodily presence in the sacramental bread ; which latter 
dogma he most strenuously combated, as was to be expected. 
Since Christ, he remarks, has declared that those whom the 
Father has given Him are with Him in His glory, they must 
all, if the doctrine of the bodily presence be true, likewise be 
with Him in the bread ; and in that case, he further observes, 
" the giant Christopher would have to squeeze himself into a 
very narrow compass to find accommodation in so small a bit 
of bread." With all his irony, however, Zwingle did not 
lose sight of the solemnity and dignity of the Lord's Supper, 
as appears from his beautiful comparison of the bread, when 
devoted to this religious purpose, with the flower of the field 
destined to adorn the bridal wreath, and the ring which 
bears the signet of the sovereign.^ So powerful was Zwingle's 

^ All these sermons were printed and published by Froschauer at Zurich. 
Zwingle's sermons may be found in his Werke, vol. ii. pp. 201 sqq. 

'•* " As a flower is more glorious when entwined in the wreath of a bride than 
it would be elsewhere, and yet, so far as its bare material is concerned, is the 
self-same thing whatsoever its position ; and as a man Avho has stolen the signet 
of a king is held responsible for more than the mere value of the gold of which it 
is comiposed, though it differs not in material from any other gold ring, so in 
the Lord's Supper the bread is of one substance with all other bread, but the use 


discourse that a mass priest, wlio was just then standing at 
the altar, and who had been listening eagerly to the preacher, 
divested himself of his robes on the spot, saying : " If such be 
the case in regard to the mass, I can no longer read it, either 
to-day or in future." 

Zwingle delivered his second sermon immediately after the 
discardure and destruction of the images, which took place on 
the 2 2d of January. The organ in the minster of St. Vincent 
was broken to pieces on the same occasion. The organist 
took a sad farewell of his instrument, playing with expression 
for the last time the hymn, Armcr Judas, was hast du 
getJian ? [" Poor Judas, what hast thou done ? "], before he was 
for ever separated from his beloved companion. Zwingle's 
sermon was a brief farewell discourse, in which he admon- 
ished the Bernese to constancy. In regard to the altars and 
images, the speaker expressed himself as follows : " There lie 
the altars and idols in the temple. This filth and rubbish 
must be cast out, in order that the incalculable sums which 
have hitherto been expended on foolish and worthless idols 
may henceforth be appropriated to the living image of God 
(the poor). They are of a weak or a contentious spirit who 
bewail the downfall of idols : such persons may now clearly 
see that there is nothing holy inherent in these images ; 
they may be handled and tossed about like any other bits 
of wood or stone. There lies one with its head off, another 
has lost an arm, etc. Now if the saints who are in the 
presence of God felt themselves outraged by such treatment 
of images that bear their names, and if they had the power 
that we (not they themselves) have ascribed to them, no 
one would have been able to move these images from their 
places, much less could they have been beheaded or maimed." 

But we have been anticipating the course of events, and 
must return to the disputation. This began on the 6 th of 

and (lif,mity of the Supper coji/ers upon it a loflhiesn of character which causes it 
to differ from other bread. " He indignantly repudiates the charge of having 
spoken of the sacramental bread as common bread [ijcntepies Beckenbrot]. 


January, and lasted until the 25th of the same month. 
Joachim von Wadt (Vadian) of St. Gall, Nicholas Briefer, 
dean of St. Peter's in Basel, Conrad Schilling, and the Abbot 
of Gottstadt (as the representative of the Provost of Interlaken, 
who was ill) presided on this occasion. No discussion of 
special importance took place. The reporters of the Popish 
party ^ themselves confessed the Papists' lack of learned dis- 
putants, and the great need that was felt of the acumen of an 
Erasmus. The most distinguished debaters on the Papist side 
were Konrad Treger, provincial of Freiburg, who had attended 
the disputation at Baden as a deputy of the Bishop of Lau- 
sanne, and the youthful John Buchstab, a schoolmaster of 
Zofingen ; these, however, were unable to prevail against the 
logic of Zwingle, Berthold Haller, Francis Kolb, Capito, and 
Bucer. Yet we must not omit to mention the occurrence of 
dissension in the very camp of the Ptcformed party, in regard 
to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper ; Benedict Burgauer, a 
pastor of St. Gall, contended for the Lutheran view, in which 
he was supported by Pastor Althammer of Nuremburg. Not- 
withstanding this difference of opinion, Bern was the scene of 
another victory on the part of the Zwinglian doctrine — a fact 
which caused Luther irefully to declare : " The children in the 
streets are rejoicing that they are delivered from a baked 
deity." 2 

It was the advice of Dean Briefer, one of the presidents, 
that any alteration in established usage should be gradually and 
cautiously brought about. The colleagues of the dean, how- 
ever, replied that the city of Bern had already had sufficient 
opportunity afforded it, by the conference that had just taken 
place, to decide upon the nature of the religion which had 
hitherto prevailed, and to discover what part of it was divine, 

^ Among them especially the priest James JMiinster of Solothurn. See 
MoRiKOFER, vol. ii. p. 102. 

^ This expression occurs in a letter to Gabriel Zwilling, dated 7th March. See 
De Wette, vol. iii. No. 359 : BerncB in Helvetiis finila disputatio est ; nihil 
factum, nisi quod Missa ahrocjata et pueri in plateis cantent, se esse a Deo insto 
liheratos. Luther also predicted that Zwingle would come to a bad end. 


and what, on tlie other hand, was of mere human institution. 
They were therefore of opinion that vigorous and intrepid 
measures should at once be resolved upon. 

This latter suggestion was adopted. Upon the departure of 
the deputies, the city council assembled the burghers and 
residents of Bern, and acquainted them with the will of the 
Government, — its inclination to do away with all abuses and 
to introduce a purified doctrine. The projDosal was received 
with joy, and was speedily set in operation by a mandate 
issued on the 3d of February. Evangelical preaching on the 
basis of the Scriptures was thereby enjoined upon all pastors 
of the canton as one of the duties of their office, the abolition 
of the mass and images was confirmed, permission to marry 
was accorded to priests, and a settlement was made with the 
occupants of the cloisters and religious foundations. All con- 
nection with the Swiss bishops was at the same time dissolved, 
and the State Government was empowered to receive the oaths 
of fidelity of preachers and deans. 

In the city of Bern, some support was still afforded to the 
adherents of the Eomish Church by the Diessbach family, who 
continued the celebration of the mass in their private worship. 
In the country also, and especially in the Bernese Oberland, 
the secularization of the cloister of Interlaken gave rise to 
disturbances which threatened to become serious. The Has- 
lithalers, by a vote of 151 against 111, reinstated the mass in 
their own district in the summer of 1528, and, in connection 
with the people of Unterwalden, who gave them encourage- 
ment and despatched help to them across the Briinig mountains, 
undertook an expedition against Bern. They were joined in 
their march by the men of Grindelwald and the inhabitants of 
the Frutiger and Simmen valleys. Sprigs of fir, worn upon 
the hat, formed the badge of the anti-Eeformers. Bern now, 
like her sister cities Zurich and Basel, was obliged, in the 
midst of her period of reformation, to confront a peasant 
insurrection which began to assume formidable proportions, 
differing, however, from the previous uprisings, through the 


fact that it originated not with Anabaptist ultra-Protestants, 
but with the no less fanatical opposition party of the 
Eeactionists. Bern took decisive measures for her own pro- 
tection ; the insurrection was quelled without bloodshed, but 
the Oberhaslithalers were severely punished by being deprived 
of their banners and j)ublic seals. 

Nor was this an isolated occurrence. The efforts of the 
opposition party to stem the current of the Eeformation in 
Switzerland became daily more manifest. These efforts, how- 
ever, were met by an increasingly urgent demand, on the 
part of the Protestant party, for a thorough accomplishment of 
reform in all cases in which half-way measures had been 
resorted to. Such measures were now, in the development 
of a general conflict, felt to be utterly unsatisfactory and 

Of the highest importance for the confirmation of the 
Eeformation in Switzerland was the more intimate connection 
which took place at this time between Zurich and Bern. On 
the 25th of June 1528, the two cities entered into an 
offensive and defensive alliance, which was to last for five 
years, and was designed not only for the protection of the 
faith of their respective states and people, but also for the 
defence of the subjects of the so-called " common provinces," 
who, on account of their religious tenets, were not infrequently 
oppressed and brought to punishment by the federal bailiffs 
and officials. The privilege of joining this alliance was also 
extended to other confederate cantons and other cities. The 
influence of Zwingle now began to be more powerfully felt in 

The tide of reformation was pressing forward at this 
time in East and West Switzerland. In Biel, where Dr. 
Wittenbach had died two years before, the images were 
abolished. In some other places, among which may be 
mentioned the canton of Glarus, the effort for reform gave 
rise to dissensions. The parishes of Matt (in the little valley) 

' Comp. MoEiKOFEE, vol. ii. pp. 107 sqq., 123 sqq. 


and Schwanden were the first to rid themselves of their images. 
One day -when the men of Schwanden went to the town of 
Glarus to market, the women gathered themselves together and 
cast the images out of the church. The adherents of the old 
system, on the other hand, bestirred themselves, and disturbed 
tlie worship of the Evangelicals with the sound of drums, etc. 
Images were treated with the utmost contumely at Wesen. 
The people placed them at the cross-roads, and told them to 
betake themselves whither they chose — to Schwytz, Glarus, 
Zurich, or Chur.^ In Toggenburg the peasants rose against 
the Abbot of St. John's. A throng of young men burst into 
the cloister church, destroyed the images and altars, and 
drove away the abbot, who took refuge at Feldkirch. At 
Altstatteil, in the valley of the Rhine, Hans Valentine 
Fortmiiller, a native of Waldshut, preached with much success, 
in spite of the opposition of Dr Winkler.^ The Eeformation 
had by this time gained ground on the shores of the lake 
of Constance, also in Thurgau. In the city of Constance, 
to the history of the Eeformation of which we are now 
brought, there were two men whom we may designate as the 
Reformers of tliat place. These were Ambrose Blarer and 
Dr. John Zwick.^ The Blarers (Blaurers) were an old patrician 
family of Gyrspag, a seigniorial manor near Emmishofen, 
wliich had given various bishops and abbots to the country. 
Ambrose was born at Constance, on the 12th of April 1492. 
llis father was a member of the council of that city. His 
mother, the excellent Margaret von Blarer, was distinguished 
for her active beneficence. She was the comforter of all the 
needy, and the foster-mother of poor and destitute children.'* 
Left fatherless at an early age, young Ambrose received his 

^ BULLINCER, ii. p. 46. 

- HoTTiXGER (continuation of John von Muller), ii. 208. 

^ For a notice of Blarer, conip. Theodor Pressel, Amhrosms Blaurers, des 
Hchwdbischen Reformators Leben unci Schriften, .Stuttg. 1861 (vol. ix. of the 
Vater unci Becjrilniler) ; Keim, Amhr. Blarer, 1861 ; Hartmann in Herzog'.s 

* An attractive portrait of this good woman is given by Fi LIX voN Oeelli in 
Piper's Evancjtlischer Kcdaidcr for 1852. 


education from the Benedictine fathers in the monastery of 
Alpirsbach. By them the aspiring youth was sent, at a later 
period, to Tubingen, where he became intimately associated 
with Melanchthon. In the year 1515 he returned to his 
" beloved studies " in the cloister. He had already been 
advanced to the position of prior when he, for the first time, 
made acquaintance with the writings of Luther. Until then, he 
tells us, though he had taken counsel with " many subtile hair- 
splitting doctors," he had never yet " looked the Holy Scriptures 
in the face, in all their clearness and refulgence, but had 
beheld them only through the cloud of human commandments, 
doctrines, and interpretation." A new light dawned upon 
him with the commencement of his acquaintance with Luther ; 
but at the same time, the peace which he had hitherto enjoyed 
in the cloister was disturbed. His abbot and the brethren of 
his order would have nothing to do with the new doctrine. 
Blarer quitted the convent in 1521 and returned to his native 
city, whence he issued a written vindication of his conduct. 
In the year 1524 the council of Constance commissioned 
him to attack the invocation of the A^'irgin. In the following 
year John Zwick became associated with him. Zwick, who 
was born in 1496, was, like Blarer, descended from a patrician 
family,^ which had removed from Switzerland to Constance. 
According to the custom of the time, he had been destined to be 
a prebend from his cradle. The Abbot of Eeichenau designated 
him as the future pastor of Eiedlingen, one of the five Austrian 
cities on the Danube ; and to this preferment the hopes of 
the boy and youth at first attached themselves. The promise 
of ecclesiastical advancement did not, however, prevent him 
from voluntarily extending the circle of his studies. He 
applied himself to the study of jurisprudence, under the 
direction of the learned Zasius, at Freiburg. Before entering 
upon his charge at Eiedlingen, in 1522, he married, contrary 
to the warning of his bishop, who had cautioned him against 

^ The names Zwick, Zwicky, Zwicker, were originally only different forms of the 
same family name. Corap. Keim's article in Herzog's Realenc. viii. p. 692 sqq. 


iunovatious. Zwick at first confined himself to the simple 
preaching of pure Christianity, laying special stress upon 
matters pertaining to the inner man, and refraining from any 
discussion of external ceremonies. But even this course of 
action brou.ght him into conflict with his clerical associates. 
In October of 1523 Zwick attended the second disputation 
of Zurich, which resulted for him in the strengthening of his 
reformatory principles. Driven from his parish at Eiedlingen, 
he arrived at Constance at exactly the right moment. In 
connection with Blarer we may from this time behold him 
pressing forward, step by step, in the cause of reform, to the 
vexation of Eomish sympathizers.^ In May 1526, both 
preachers besought the council to institute measures for the 
holding of a religious conference, which accordingly took place 
in the following year (1527). A decisive influence was 
exerted in Constance by the happy termination of the disputa- 
tion of Bern (1528), at which Blarer was personally present. 
On the lOtli of March succeeding the last-mentioned 
disputation, the two councils of Constance decided that it 
was " better to fall under the disfavour of men than to incur 
the wrath of God." The abolition of the mass, altars, and 
images was resolved upon, although not immediately accom- 
plished, for it was not until 1531 that the work of the 
Picformation in Constance might be regarded as completed.^ 
As early as 1526, however, Bishop Hugo von Landenberg 
had found himself compelled to abandon the venerable 
episcopal see of Constance and to take up his residence in 
INIorsburg, at which place he also exercised his inquisitorial 

^ The Romanists composed the following bail verses in relation to both Blarer 
and Zwick : — 

[" Claier and, 
Long-nose and Thicky, 
Were they dangling from one rope, 
Tlien might Constance have some hope." 

'^ After the Smalkaldian "War, Constance was lost to the cause of the Reforma- 
tion. Of this later. Comp. Vikkdiidt, Ge.sch. dcs Protestantismus in Con-stmiz 
(in ScHKEiBEii's Tasr.htnhuch fur Gcuch. mid Alterthum m Suddentscldand, vol. 
iii., 1841). 

Der Bhirer und der Zwick, 
Dcr Langnas und der Dick, 
Hingen's all' an einem Strick, 
So hatt' Constanz wieder Gluek. 


powers. The matin priest of Sernatingen. John Hiiglin of 
Lindau, was tried before a spiritual court, and burned at 
Morsburg on the 10th of May 1527/ The cathedral 
chapter of Constance retired to Ueberlingen, accompanied by 
a worthy canon who for some time had been a representative 
of the liberal tendency, but who was unable to reconcile 
himself to the Eeformation and its consequences — we 
refer to John von Bozheim, a friend of Erasmus and, for 
a time, of Blarer.^ On the 10th of October 1527, Constance 
concluded a treaty of burghership with Zurich, which took 
effect on the 25th of December following, and was to con- 
tinue for ten years. 

With the Eeformation in Constance, that of Thurgau was 
in measure connected,^ though movements of reform had pre- 
viously been excited in the latter province by Zurich and 
Schaffhausen. The Anabaptist and kindred tendencies had also 
early found representatives in Thurgau, among whom may be 
mentioned Stephen Stor of Diessenhofen, and Ludwig Hatzer 
of Bischoffzell. In Stein, on the Ehine, Erasmus Schmidt 
preached to crowded audiences, and at Dissenhofen the gospel 
was proclaimed by Fortmiiller, who had been driven from 
Waldshut. A decisive influence in favour of the Thursjovian 
Eeformation was wielded by the Diet of Weinfelden, in 
December 1528. It was there determined that all compul- 
sion in matters of faith should cease. In consequence of this 
resolution, images and altars were abolished, and the reform 
was accomplished with such rapidity that in less than a 
month the only place in Upper Thurgau in which mass was 
celebrated was Bischoffzell. The canons of this place for 
some time resisted the Eeformation. On the 25th of 
January 1529, however, the town council demanded of the 
chapter whether the latter would undertake to defend the use 
of the mass and images from the Scriptures, and in default of 

^ BuLLiNGER (i. p. 340) places the whole occurrence in the previous year. 
" Walchnek, Johann von Bozheim, Schaifhauseu, 1863. 
* PupiKOFEE, Geschichte des Thurgaus, vol. ii. 


a satisfactory answer, the images and altars were removed. 
Blarer was summoned thither to complete the Eeformation. 
On the 2Gth of April in the same year, a similar occurrence 
took place at Frauenfeld. Some of the cloisters of Thurgau 
voluntarily embraced the Eeformation ; of these, Fischingen 
was one. The nuns at Kathrinenthal, on tlie other hand, 
offered the most obstinate resistance to the Reformed party, 
and were in some cases treated with rudeness and violence. 
Some burghers of Diessenhofen, to whose jurisdiction the 
convent belonged, proposed to beat in the doors with axes. 
This the council would not allow, but it commanded the 
abolition of the old ritual of worship, to which the nuns 
were passionately attached. The prioress and tw^o of the 
principal sisters made their escape to Schaffhausen. Ineffectual 
attempts were made to win the remaining occupants of the 
cloister by persuasion, or to intimidate them by threats. 
Messengers were despatched to Kathrinenthal from both 
parties, — from Zurich, Bern, Glarus, and Solothurn, as well 
as from the three cantons. At last the people of Diessenhofen 
broke into the church of the convent and burned the imao-es 
without mercy. As those that represented St. Nicholas and 
St. Katharine would not take fire, they were flung into the 
Ehine. This piece of brutality could have no other effect 
than to increase the fanaticism of the nuns. They defended 
themselves most desperately with stones, billets of wood, and 
broom-sticks — such weapons as they had at hand. But all 
was of no avail. Their rude besiegers caroused in the sacred 
rooms and amused themselves by threatening the nuns with 
the hangman. An old official of the nunnery, who strove to 
take the part of the terrified women, was locked up in the 
tower, after having his teeth knocked out. Messengers again 
appeared from the four cantons mentioned above. Long 
discourses were addressed to the nuns, in the hope of inducing 
them to receive the word of God (" which," their would-be 
reformers declared, was " as clear as day ") and to abandon 
the dress of their order. Vain endeavour ! The nuns threw 


themselves on their knees and begged for mercy. They ap- 
pealed to all the eight cantons, but without effect. They 
were forcibly stripped of their conventual robes, which were 
committed to the flames, and it was even recommended that 
they should be compelled to attend upon the preaching of the 
Eeformed ministers. A few succeeded in saving themselves 
from further indignities by flight.^ 

Such shameful excesses as the above should be neither 
concealed, palliated, nor excused by history. The' history of 
the Eeformation has its dark shadows, which continually 
remind us of the truth, that only where heavenly wisdom 
sways the soul, can the word of God, preached in wisdom and 
gentleness, iind entrance ; that a false zeal does but consume 
instead of edifying, and excites the lowest passions, instead of 
implanting a noble courage and awakening confidence in the 
good cause. 

^ HoTTiNGER, ill loc. pp. 206-208,, from couteniporaneous sources. 









AS we saw in the preceding chapter, Zurich and Bern, 
East and West Switzerland, had, at the time of which 
we are speaking, heen brought into a closer connection with 
each other through the issue of the Bernese disputation. 
The links of the chain formed by the adherents of the new 
faith, who were quick to extend to one another the hand of 
fellowship and aid, now become more and more closely riveted ; 
whilst, on the contrary, the old bonds of the Helvetic Con- 
federation were dissolving and hastening to a violent rupture. 
Basel itself could no longer maintain its intermediate 
posture. A decision was at length to be reached even there. 
The year commencing with the spring of 1528 and closing 
with that of 1529 was a period of both civil and ecclesiastical 
ferment. On Good Friday, 10 th April, five burghers of the 
spinners' guild, without the knowledge of Q^^colampadius, 
broke in pieces the altars and images in St. Martin's Church,^ 
and on the following Easter Monday twenty-four burghers 
removed the images from the church of the Augustinians. 
Tlie authorities arrested the iconoclasts — a procedure which 
excited great indignation among their comrades of the spinners' 

^ [The church of (Ecolanipadhis.] 


guild. The latter resolved to lay before the council a petition 
on behalf of their imprisoned brethren. As they were about 
proceeding to the guild house for the purpose of carrying their 
resolution into effect, they were joined at the corn market by 
200 other burghers who had determined to assist in supporting 
the cause of the prisoners. The council, being at that time in 
session, despatched some of its members, with the chief guild- 
master at their head, to the market to inquire into the intentions 
of the assembled burghers. A committee of thirty-four gave 
the following reply to the deputies from the council : — " A 
wise Government might, by a vigorous mandate, at once abolish 
the continual dissensions of the preachers, whose disputes give 
rise to so many unpleasantnesses. The idols " (thus the images 
were styled) " cannot surely be valued so highly as to cause 
the imprisonment or punishment of honest citizens. We are 
sufficiently instructed by God's word that image service is an 
abomination to God. We therefore request that the prisoners 
may be released, and that an end may be put to the insults 
and slanders of the Papists." 

This demand having been made known to the council, 
another embassage was sent to the assembled burghers, com- 
manding them to disperse, but directing, at the same time, that 
a committee of six should remain and await the decision of 
the senate. After some opposition, the burghers submitted 
to this arrangement, begging, however, for a " satisfactory 
answer ; " they then withdrew, only half appeased, and with 
many murmurs, to their guild hall. The request of the 
burghers was the subject of a lengthy deliberation in the 
council ; and when at last an answer was resolved upon, it was 
not quite so satisfactory as might have been desired. " The 
prisoners," thus ran the reply, " shall be released, and a pardon 
shall be granted to all who have incurred the- displeasure of 
the Government in this matter." In the foregoing sentence 
the burghers acquiesced, it is true, yet without suppressing the 
wish for a final decision in regard to the images. Their 
desire was complied with a few days later, though the council 


Still refrained from any but half-way measures ; this middle 
course on the part of the Government was owing to the fact 
that a minority of the burghers and, above all, some members 
of the council -svere still opposed to the Eeformation. The 
decree of the 18th of April provided that, "to please the 
Eeformed, the images should be removed by workmen com- 
missioned by the authorities from the churches of St. Martin, 
St. Leonard, the Augustinians and Franciscans, and the 
Hospital. In order, however, that tlie adherents of the old 
faith might celebrate the worship of God in their w^ay, the 
choir and associate chapels of St. Leonard and the Franciscans 
should continue to be adorned as before, remaining shut, 
however, to prevent vexation to any during the observance of 
the reformed service. In the other churches of the city, all 
the ornaments and images should remain unchanged and 
unmolested." Those who opposed this mandate, as well as all 
who should band themselves together for rebellious purposes, 
or create any disturbance whatever, were threatened with 
punishment, extending even to loss of life. 

These half-way measures were adhered to for some time. 
No further tumults occurred during the following summer and 
autumn. On the contrary, (Ecolampadius availed himself of 
this season for an initial church visitation, which he conducted 
through the medium of his deacon, Jerome Bothanus, giving 
expression to his gentle and pious sentiments in a pastoral 
letter to his ministerial brethren throughout the country.'' 
Towards the end of the year, however, the fire, which had all 
the while been smouldering beneath the ashes, burst out afresh. 
There had been, now and again, various collisions between the 
two parties, and harsh words had been exchanged even in the 
council, in consequence of which one of the members declared 
that he would not attend another meeting unless earnest 
measures were taken to secure justice and peace. 

On Wednesday the 23d of December, three hundred 
burghers from all the different guilds assembled at the hall of 

' This ktter may be found in Burckhardt'.s Reformations geschichte Baml.s. 


the Gardeners' Company, and drew up a respectful and 
moderate petition to the council, for the purpose of obtaining 
from that body a final decision in the matter. The petitioners 
disclaimed at the outset all evil and seditious designs. " If 
we knew of one among us," they declared, " who by a single 
word should discover a disorderly and quarrelsome intent, we 
would accuse him to your excellencies as a disobedient and 
disloyal person." They were moved, they asserted, to the step 
which they were taking solely by a desire for the glory of 
God and of the faith, and by consideration for the peace and 
unity of the whole city of Basel. The petitioners next 
demonstrated how little attention had been paid to the 
magistratic ordinance in reference to pulpit dissensions, and 
how much envy and hatred the latter had occasioned among 
the burghers. " Dear and gracious sirs," the address con- 
tinued, " what is such discordant preaching save a root of 
many vices, a cloak for hypocrisy, a bewilderment to entangled 
consciences, a fortifier of the wicked, a suppression of the 
truth, an awakening of the wrath of God, and a disgrace to 
the whole city of Basel?" The Government was therefore 
entreated to put a stop to these disorders, and to remove all 
preachers whose sermons did not harmonize with the gospeh 
It was also requested that the mass should be abolished until 
the priests had satisfactorily vindicated it, in which case the 
burghers would again receive it. " If, however, it be wrong 
and an abomination in the sight of God, why should we, 
for the sake of the priests, draw down God's wrath upon 
us and fight against truth and the Holy Spirit ? " The 
plea that the church councils had decided in favour of 
the mass was, the petitioners affirmed, powerless to change 
their minds, since it was well known that even the councils 
had made mistakes and contradicted each other. Nor had 
the discussions at Baden and Bern been of any avail, " thougli 
they had cost the city of Basel a pretty penny." " If, however, 
it be urged that no one's faith can be forced, we would state 
that we do not desire impossibilities ; for God alone gives faith. 


Nevertheless, false teachers and other scandals shovdd not be 
endured by any Christian government, any more than a mother 
should suffer lier daughters to associate with bad women, and 
excuse herself by saying that God must take care of them." 
It was stated, furthermore, that the distrust that had mani- 
fested itself among tlie burghers upon various occasions, such 
as on guard duty and in field service,' already exceeded that 
which existed between Jews and Christians, the Evangelicals, 
who were regarded as apostate Christians, being more detested 
by tlie Piomanists than Jews. Should it be objected that it 
would be difficult to decide in such a case, in which learned 
men were themselves at odds, such an objection would be like 
blasphemy, since it would make it appear as if Christ had 
given us a law, and commanded us to keep it, on pain of 
everlasting perdition, and yet had failed to make that law 
intelligible to every layman. Who would seek to compel 
another to travel a certain road and yet be anxious to conceal 
that road from him ? What is it to us, said the burghers, 
that a few learned doctors, actuated by their great avarice, 
envy, and pride, refuse to receive the truth ? It is not hidden 
on that account. The burghers then reminded the council 
that the opposite party had already resorted to arms, and 
urged that they themselves would be forced to answer violence 
with violence, unless the illegal measures of their opponents 
were combated. " As we," thus closes the address, " are seeking 
the glory of God and the peace of the entire city of Basel, 
we shall not and cannot desist from our entreaties, night and 
day, until your excellencies graciously hear us ; for there is 
nothing in this world that we have more at heart, unless, 
indeed, we should discover that our petition is dishonourable 
to God and hurtful to the city of Basel — an alternative which, 
however, will not occur. We therefore beseech your 
excellencies without further delay to lend a gracious and 
fatherly ear to obedient burghers." 

^ Literally "on joiirnoys " [auf den Rwe7i\ liy which, however, according 
to the usage of the day, military expeditions were meant. 


As soon as the opposite party, consisting of the inhabitants 
of Little Basel and the suburb of Spahlen, heard of the 
vigorous but legitimate proceedings of the burghers at 
Gardeners' Hall, they betook themselves to arms, in the hope 
of violently dispersing the friends of the Eeformation. This 
was the first step towards a disturbance of the public peace. 
It was met, on the part of the Government, by a deputation. 
But instead of receiving the law-abiding petition of the 
majority of burghers. Burgomaster Meltinger, a zealous 
adherent of the old faith, refused to have anything to do with 
it, and adjured the burghers to proceed immediately to their 
homes. They, however, persisted in their demand for a 
hearing, and declined to disperse until Adelberg Meyer, the 
other burgomaster, and the head guildmaster, James Meyer 
(zum Hirschen),^ took charge of their address and assured 
them that they should have an answer in two days. 

The peace was, however, of no long continuance. The 
night after St. Stephen's day, between the 25 th and 26 th 
of December, the burghers of Little Basel and Spahlen again 
took up arms. The opposing party then also assembled, 
numbering at first but 800 ; repairing to their former 
meeting-place at Gardeners' Hall, they increased their force 
to 3000 by arming the apprentices. Thus the burghers 
confronted each other, armed, in a war of creeds. On the 
same night, amid these hostile preparations, the council 
gathered, faint - hearted and irresolute. It was already 
reported, furthermore, that federal representatives were 
expected, who would endeavour to mediate a peace. Message 
after message meantime was sent to the burghers ; they were 
admonished, soothed, advised to hope for better times to come. 
The Eeformed party always listened most willingly to Adelberg 
and James Meyer (of the Stag), whilst they put no con- 

* This James Meyer zum Hirschen must be carefully distinguished from 
James Meyer zum Hasen. The latter was an opponent of the Reformation, 
while the former was one of its friends. See OcHS, vol. v. pp. 313, 434, 
449, 632. 


lidence in the Papist Meltinger, After niucli discussion, it 
was at last agreed that committees should be chosen from 
each side. The Reformed delegated fifty men, who remained 
at the Gardeners' Hall ; the Catholics also named some, who 
took up their quarters at the Fishmongers' Hall. The latter, 
in their turn, now presented a petition to the council, begging 
them to leave things as they were. Advice was daily sought, 
and good advice was scarce. Only two of the gates of the 
city were left open at this time, and those were guarded by a 
strong watch. The minds of all were in a state of expectancy 
and excitement. Finally, deputies from Zurich and Bern 
made their appearance, Nicholas Manuel being one of those 
from the last-mentioned city. Others also arrived from 
Lucerne, Uri, Schwytz, Zug, Solothurn, and Schaffhausen, and 
ambassadors were received from Strassburg and Miihlhausen. 
A commission, composed of four members of the council and 
four burghers, was appointed to draw up proposals, with tlie 
following result. It was suggested that a public discussion 
concerning the mass should take place, two weeks after 
Whitsunday, in the church of the Franciscans, in presence of 
all the burghers, and that no arguments should be considered 
valid at this meeting save such as should be drawn from the 
word of God. After the close of the disputation, the vote 
of the people should be taken at the halls of the different 
guilds, and a decision be given in favour of the majority. 
The preachers were recommended to make thorough prepara- 
tion for the discussion in the meantime, and for that end to 
assemble at least twice a week, to confer amicably upon the 
disputed points. Any who taught contrary to the Holy 
Scriptures should be called to account for their doctrines ; 
and, finally, no one should usurp the office of the Government 
by interfering with the mass or the images. No one should 
ibrce another to attend mass or violently keep him therefrom, 
but every man should be free to act in accordance with the 
dicttites of his own conscience. This proposal was made 
known to the assembled burghers. The council called tof:jether 


all the guilds and companies, ordering the Evangelicals to 
assemble at the church of the Franciscans, while the Eoman 
Catholics were to repair to that of the Dominicans. Twenty- 
five hundred appeared at the former place and six hundred at 
the latter. From this it became manifest that more than 
four-fifths of the burgher population were upon the side of 
the Eeformation ; many, however, who were undecided, 
remained at home without voting at all. The minority, 
nevertheless, persisted stedfastly in their views and their 
demands. They entered a formal protest against the foregoing 
resolutions, and submitted the following statement to the 
senate. They earnestly entreated that the lords councillors 
would consider well this weighty and most important affair, 
remembering that their canton (the canton of Basel) was not 
like Zurich and Bern, which drew their rents, taxes, and other 
revenues from their ow^n dominions ; while Basel, on the other 
hand, derived the most considerable part of its income from 
the neighbouring duchy of Austria and the margraviate of 
Baden, neither of which countries was favourable to the 
Eeformation. It would be well, therefore, they suggested, to 
act circumspectly and do nothing that might prove injurious to 
the city. They also endeavoured to vindicate their extra- 
ordinary assumption of arms and to give it a legitimate 
colouring. They had perceived, they declared, that the senate 
was no longer master of the city, and had therefore assembled 
under arms to see for themselves who would oppose the 
Government ; they would thus have been ready, in case of 
need, cheerfully to lay down their lives for their Government, 
as faithful subjects. In regard to the proposed points, they 
could by no means consent to them. They hoped that their 
priests had instructed them aright ; they would sacrifice 
their lives rather than suffer that their wives and children 
should no longer be instructed agreeably to the doctrines of 
their forefathers. They trusted that they might be permitted 
to abide by the former mandate, which granted them five 
churches, with which number they would rest satisfied. 


And tliey begged, in conclusion, tliat tjicy might be allowed 
to retain undisturbed their old faith and ecclesiastical usages. 
By this plea in favour of the old faith, which, though it 
proceeded from the minority, was yet as decided in its 
character as any that had been urged ar/ainst that faith, the 
council beheld itself plunged into new embarrassments. It 
stood between two fires. The mandate just issued could not 
be recalled without exciting the indignation of the majority ; 
nor was it desirable to leave the minority entirely unsatisfied, 
since even its threats were productive of apprehension. This 
condition of affairs led to a renewal of the command that no 
person should disturb another in the performance of his religious 
exercises, or revile him on account of his faith, under penalty 
of being fined five pounds ; in addition to this, the singing of 
hymns in German was forbidden in all churches in which it 
had not yet been introduced — a measure in favour of the 
adherents of the old faith which afforded a palpable contra- 
diction to the plan of reformation that had been so valiantly 
ushered in. But these half-way measures were of no avail. 
The confederate envoys had no sooner departed than fresh 
disturbances arose. The Catholic priests could not be induced 
to attend the weekly meetings. On account of this refusal, 
they were suspended from the exercise of their official 
functions, so that for a period of fourteen days there was 
neither preaching nor mass in the cathedral, St, Ulrick's, St. 
Peter's, or St. Theodore's. Some of the pillars of the old faith, 
such as the Suffragan-Bishop Marius and the Dominican monk 
Pelargus, left the city ; Ludwig Ber, professor of theology in 
the University and provost of St. Peter's, was also among the 
missing. This flight of the shepherds at a time when the 
flock was in danger, was far from making a favourable 
impression upon the latter, and the number of the adherents 
of the old faith daily diminished. Notwithstanding the now 
languishing condition of the Romish party, however, its 
members continued their efforts for the mastery. With the 
approval of Burgomaster Meltinger, Sebastian Mliller, preacher 


at St. Peter's, ascen<led the pulpit of that church, despite the 
interdict of the Government, and endeavoured to stir up the 
people against the followers of the new faith. Several of the 
latter, apprehending mischief, purposely entered the church, 
and were roundly abused by their fellow-citizens of the 
Catholic persuasion. There ensued a lively war of words, 
which came near resulting in personal hostilities. 

Those of the burghers who were in favour of reform were 
greatly incensed at this occurrence, especially in view of the 
fact that Miiller had had the temerity to enter the pulpit in 
opposition to the mandate of the Government. They pressed 
for a vigorous administration of justice. Meltinger, who had 
arbitrarily granted the contTOversialist permission to preach, 
found himself compelled to make a formal apology before the 
senate, which public humiliation of the burgomaster seemed 
somewhat to pacify the burghers. But the suspicion that a 
number of the council, — chiefly such members as were related 
to priests, — and at the head of all such the Burgomaster 
Meltinger, were designedly impeding the Eeformation by 
artifice, was now too deeply rooted to be readily removed. 
The obstruction caused by such men must be removed. 

The Lenten season of the year 1529 was a stormy one. 
On the Monday before Ash Wednesday, 800 burghers 
assembled in the church of the Franciscans, and at the close 
of morning prayers resolved to demand of the council that all 
its members who were unfavourable to the pure word of God, 
or who had relatives in the priesthood, should, without com- 
promising their dignity, vacate their seats until the matter at 
issue had been decided. This was a bold request. The council 
endeavoured to demonstrate to the burghers the difficulty of 
compliance with it. They begged that they might at least be 
allowed time for consideration, and promised to return an 
answer on the following day. But the distrustful ones 
among the burghers beheld in this delay only a cover for new 
evasions. They all, indeed, retired, with the avowed intention 
of awaiting the decision of the senate ; but at six o'clock in 


the evening, suspicion and impatience inipelled them to 
reassemble, when they declared that they would have an 
answer that very night. The city now assumed a critical 
and warlike aspect. Armed men patrolled the streets and 
bivouacked in the public squares. Guards were posted at 
the halls of the vintners, the leather dressers, and the spinners. 
Chains were fastened across the streets, cannon were mounted, 
and the city gates, the armoury, and the towers were occupied. 
Vessels containing resin were placed in the streets and kept 
burning throughout the entire night. The coming of the 
morrow was anticipated with many apprehensions. Burgo- 
master Meltinger, in company with his son-in-law, Egloff 
von Offenburgh, had already taken refuge in flight, having 
descended the Rhine in a little boat, under cover of the night 
and the mist.^ Other members of the council likewise took 
their departure from the city by stealth. These occurrences 
strengthened the suspicions and tlie courage of the Reformed, 
and seemed to augment the justice of their demand. 

By dawn the next day the numl^er of men under arms was 
increased to two thousand. The council already manifested a 
disposition to accede to the burghers' demand for the with- 
drawal of the adherents of Catholicism ; the Catholic members, 
however, opposed this arrangement and called for federal 
arbitration. Messengers were therefore despatched in haste to 
the cantons of Zurich and Bern, and every effort was employed 
meantime to appease the public mind. Political questions 
respecting the constitution of Basel were involved in the 
demand of the burghers — a fact which added to the intricacy 
of the matter. It was with difficulty that Hans Irmi, the 
popular orator, whom CEcolampadius describes as a man of 
admirable constancy and fidelity, succeeded in calming the 
excited spirits of the burghers. 

A chance occurrence gave a more rapid and less dangerous 
turn to the affair than had l^een deemed possible. A patrol, 
consisting of forty burghers, in going their rounds entered the 
^ [See D'Aubigxe's Iliatory of the Reformation, vol. iv. p. 208.] 


cathedral ; and one of the men made a thrust with his halberd 
at an altar closet, so that an image contained in it fell down 
and broke. Encouraged by this circumstance, the other men 
followed his example. Some priests and their supporters ran 
to the scene of action, when hot words were exchanged, not- 
withstanding which the forty men soon after quietly withdrew. 
At the Spitalsprung (the Miinsterberg), however, they encoun- 
tered a force of three hundred, who, having already heard of 
the foregoing collision, were hastening to their assistance. 
What need was there for further deliberation ? A sense of 
superiority took possession of the armed band, and, without 
waiting for orders from a higher authority, they proceeded to 
action. Having arrived at the cathedral, they burst open the 
doors, which had in the meantime been shut by the priests, 
and then commenced a Vandalic shattering and smashing of 
images, both in the cathedral and also in the neighbouring 
churches of St. Ulric and St. Alban. The fragments were 
next piled up outside the churches, and fires were kindled, by 
the crackling flames of which the guards warmed themselves. 
Similar occurrences soon took place in the other churches of 
the Great Basel. The people of Little Basel, however, upon 
hearing of these proceedings, gathered up their images in all 
haste, and, with the permission of the authorities, stored them 
in the lofts of the church. The stone figures at the gate of the 
suburb of Spahlen were also protected from the general assault. 

Who now should allay the storm ? The deputies of the 
Government, on recommending moderation, received the follow- 
ing blunt reply : " What you, with all your deliberations, have 
been unable to accomplish in three years, loc have brought 
about in one hour." Some of the more turbulent spirits 
suggested that the city hall should be stormed and the 
council compelled to take some decisive measure. But the 
good sense of the majority sufficed to keep the evil inclina- 
tions of such brawlers in check. 

What course remained for the council but to give their 
assent to what had transpired, and to impress upon it the 


stamp of legality ? Only thus could the inchoate revolution 
be turned back into the channel of reformation. This was 
done. A mandate was issued in regard to the discardure 
of the images and the abolition of the mass ; and on 
the very next day, which was Ash Wednesday, it was 
decreed that the fragments remaining from the shattered 
images, pictures, and altars should be distributed among 
the poor for firewood. This plan, however, giving rise to 
many disputes, which resulted in numerous frays and wounds, 
most of the woodwork was brought to the square of the 
cathedral, divided into several heaps, and burned ; so that, 
as the wit of the victorious party expressed it, the saints 
certainly kept their Ash Wednesday on this occasion.^ A 
similar course was pursued in the squares of the other churches ; 
and even the citizens of Little Basel were obliged to abandon 
to the flames those treasures that they had so carefully rescued. 
Many a heart that, through lack of enlightenment, still clung 
to the ancient faith, felt itself outraged and cut to the quick 
by these scenes. " They could have wept tears of blood," 
says CEcolampadius. But all this was but the bitter transi- 
tion to better things. That purer evangelical conviction which 
not only takes away, but also bestows, and not only pulls 
down, but also builds up and establishes, was now to become 
manifest in fairer and more enduring works. The labours of 
(Ecolanipadius and his associates were not to be submerged in 
the passionate movements of an excited populace. The spirit 
of repose and order, the spirit of moderation and discipline, 
was to return, and with it the blessing of reform was to be 
diffused over city and country. 

When the first violence of the storm had subsided, the 
federal envoys from Zurich, Bern, Solothurn, and Schaffhausen 
made their appearance, and deputies also arrived from the 
cities of Constance and IMlihlhausen. The measures adopted 
by the Government in regard to the images and the mass 
were confirmed and enforced througli the mediation of these 

' See the letter of Gicolampadiu.s, Ociis, vol. v. p. C59. 


ambassadors, a general amnesty was proclaimed, and all were 
admonished to refrain from reproachful comments on the 
recent disturbances. 

A smooth way was now speedily made for the chariot of 
reform, and all requisite measures were taken to usher it in 
with due legality. 

On Saturday the 15th of February, several councillors were 
commissioned to attend the federal envoys to the halls of the 
dijSerent guilds, for the purpose of informing the burghers of the 
treaty of peace, and receiving from them the oath of fidelity 
and obedience. All went on with the greatest tranquillity. 
Some opposition, in reference to the hnages, was met with in 
Little Basel, but was speedily quelled.^ Important changes 
among the incumbents of offices in the Church and University 
followed in the train of the Eeformation. The place of the 
Suffragan-Bishop Marius was again occupied by Telamonius 
Limperger, a man of evangelical sentiments. By order of 
the council he preached for a short time at the minster, until 
CEcolampadius was appointed cathedral preacher. The latter 
had, previous to this, practically discharged the functions of 
an antistcs (a prelate in the Eeformed Church), It was not, 
however, until later that such an office was regularly consti- 
tuted and handed down to successors. The power of the 
Catholic bishop was a thing of the past. The pious but aged 
and infirm Christopher von Utenheim had died at Delsberg 
in 1527. His successor, Philip von Gundelsheim, retired to 
Pruntrut, and the cathedral chapter removed to Freiburg, in 
Breisgau, whence in later years it returned to the neighbour- 
hood of Basel and settled in Arlesheim. A large proportion 
of the cloister clergy were scattered in like manner. 

Basel lost at this time others, also, who stood in the fore- 
most ranks of learning, and who had been distinguished for 
the moderation of their sentiments ; among these were Dr. Ber, 
Glareanus (Loriti), and Erasmus. It was with reluctance that 
Erasmus quitted a city that had become a second home to him, 
^ Comp. OcHS, vol. \. p. 569. 


and a friend to whom he was so tenderly attached as Boniface 
Amerbach. By the hitter he was escorted to the Rhine, wliere 
he embarked for Freiburg. In the following elegiac stanza he 
gave involuntary expression to his feelings at departing ^ : — 

" Nun lebe wohl, Basel ! die weitvor anderen Stadten 
Mir ein gastliches Dach Jahre lang frcundlich gewalirt. 
Heil dir und alles Gute ! und dass deineu Mauren doch nimmer 
Nalie ein schlimmerer Gast, als dir Erasmus es war." 

Ei-asmus did not like Freiburg as well as the more home- 
like Basel. In the year 1535, he returned to the latter city, 
with the intention, however, of travelling farther. But within 
its walls he was overtaken by death. After passing the winter 
on a sick-bed (he suffered from his old maladies, the stone 
and the gout, complicated at last with diarrhoea), he died on 
the 12th of July 1536, without the rites of the Romish 
Church, but calling upon the name of Jesus. His tomb may 
be seen in the minster at Basel. And here let us take a 
final leave of this man, the subject of so many encomiums, 
who himself prepared the w^ay for the new time, yet failed to 
understand God's ways in that time." 

' " Jam Basilea vale ! qua non ur1)s altera multis 

Annis exhibuit gratius hospitium. 
Hinc precor omnia laeta tibi, simul illud, Erasmo 

Hospes uti ne unquam tristior adveniat ! " 
- As may readily be comprehended, very diverse opinions were entertained 
concerning Erasmus, both by his contemporaries and by succeeding generations. 
Violent controversies arose between his admirers and his opponents. Kirchhofer, 
in his Life of Far el, vol. ii. p. 140, relates the following interesting anecdote, 
touching upon this imint (ex schecUs Bihl. Fcesch.). Farel upon one occasion, 
when travelling through Basel (about the year 1557), gave vent, as he sat 
at the public table in the inn of the Wild Man, to his indignation against 
Erasmus, who had then long been dead, and called him (one-sidedly enough) 
"the worst and most corrui)t of mortals." Beza, Farel's companion, chimed in 
with the latter in his censure of Erasmus, and declared him to have been an 
Arian, an unbeliever in the merits of Christ. The conversation being reported 
to Erasmus' friends, Amerbach, Frobenius, and Episcopius, they, not unreason- 
ably, manifested some displeasure thereat and termed the remarks a slander. 
It is not known in what way Farel defended himself ; and it is equally uncertain 
to what extent the colloquy between Farel and Beza may have been misrepre- 
sented by those who repeated it. The friendly relations existing between 
Erasmus and the Amerbachs are evident, especially from the letters of the 
former to Boniface Amerbach, on which comp. Stockmeyer, Schioeizerlschcs 
Musrinn, ii. pp. 73 sqip 


By the departure of such distinguished men as those whom 
we have mentioned, the University of Basel unquestionably 
lost some portion of its brilliancy ; yet it cannot be said that 
the Eeformation had an injurious effect upon that institution, 
if the higher office of a school of learning be taken into 
consideration. If it be admitted that the true greatness of 
such an institution depends not solely upon the multitude of 
illustrious names that it can boast, and the number of its 
students, but also upon the spirit by which it is animated, the 
fact is patent that the introduction of the Protestant spirit 
into the body of this Papal establishment could have none 
but a beneficial effect ; and though it is true that after the 
change a certain torpor and rigidity eventually crept over the 
University again, that circumstance is partially connected with 
the fact that the spirit of Protestantism as a whole was after a 
while narrowed and compressed into an unfortunate formalism. 
Basel, in its Eeformed University, continued to be one of the 
chief nurseries of Eeformed theologians, not only for Switzer- 
land, but also for more remote countries. The epoch of an 
ecclesiastico-political transformation, doubtless, was at first 
anything but favourable to a quiet pursuit of learning, and 
fears were entertained in regard to the further subsistence of 
the University. In view of this condition of affairs we must, 
with Ochs,^ look with increased admiration upon the men who, 
" inauspicious though the times were, nevertheless despaired 
not of a happy termination to them." 

On the 15th of September 1532, the continued existence 
of the University v/as assured, and its prerogatives were con- 
firmed. The chairs which had been vacated were soon filled 
by other celebrated teachers. Simon Grynseus and Sebastian 
Miinster were called from Heidelberg ; of these the former 
was a learned theologian and philologist, and the latter 
possessed a thorough knowledge of Hebrew, mathematics, 
cosmography, and history. 

Simon Grynaeus (Gryner), the progenitor of a learned race, 

1 Vol. vi. p. 62. 


was born at Vehringen in Swabia in the year 1493. His 
parents were simple peasants. He received his education at 
the town school of Pforzheim, and afterwards visited Vienna 
and Buda, the Ofen of the present day. At the latter place, 
the position of rector of the academy was conferred upon 
him. His humanistic tendencies, however, soon came in con- 
flict with the views of the mendicant friars, and he left Buda 
and repaired to Wittenberg, where he met with his old school 
friend Melanchthon. From the year 1524 to the time of his 
removal to Basel, he occupied the chair of professor of Greek 
at Heidelberg. At Speier, whither he went for the purpose 
of attending the Diet in the spring of 1529, he narrowly 
escaped imprisonment, his preservation from which he regarded 
as a miraculous one, effected through the agency of an angel. 
He soon after received his call to Basel, where he already 
possessed a friend in the person of CEcolampadius. By the 
side of the latter he laboured for a few years, and then became 
a witness of his death. 

Sebastian Miinster, a native of the Palatinate, was also a 
resident of Heidelberg at the time of his summons to the 
University of Basel. Other professors at this institution were 
Paul Phrygio of Schlettstadt, CEcolampadius himself, and, after 
the death of the latter, Myconius, all of whom imparted 
instruction in theology. The name of Amerbach threw lustre 
over the study of jurisprudence ; and Albanus Torinus and 
Oswald Ber distinguished themselves in the department of 

We cannot on this occasion refrain from adverting to Thomas 
Plater, whom we have already frequently mentioned in the 
course of this history, and who was a perfect original in his 
way. A native of Griiuchen in the Valais, Thomeli followed 
the calling of a poor shepherd boy, and passed through some 
of the strangest adventures while he was still in his youth.^ 
After many wanderings, the account of which forms a notable 

' C'omp. the oft-quoted description of Fraxz ; also Fechtep., Oeschichte des 
Schulwtstun in Basel. 


contribution to the history of the manners of that time, the 
merry youth became amanuensis to Myconius at Zurich ; he 
next learned the trade of ropemaking with Collin, the accom- 
plished linguist, and afterwards entered the service of a certain 
G. Stiiheli at Basel, a man who passed for the roughest 
master on all the Ehine. Not only did Plater, while at 
work, secretly peruse his Latin books, which he cunningly 
fastened to his bundle of hemp, but he even delivered lectures 
on the Hebrew language in his journeyman's apron. In the 
pursuit of learning, he was assisted more particularly by 
Oporinus (Herbst), who, after having been a printer, became, 
soon after the Preformation, the first rector of the school at 
Burg, — i.e. the Gymnasium. He was succeeded in this 
office by Thomas Plater, who had also for a time been printer 
and schoolmaster by turns. Plater entered upon the rectorate 
in 1541 ; he then bought the estate of Gundeldingen for 
six hundred and sixty florins, and practised agriculture in 
addition to teaching. 

The excessive many-sidedness of Plater's mind prevented 
him from ever becoming a persevering and sterling worker in 
any particylar line ; though a man who, while struggling 
against a thousand difficulties, is constantly reaching after 
some new and original attainment, offers much that is attrac- 
tive to the observer. The more thorough, perhaps, for the 
desultormess of the father, were ultimately the labours of the 
son in the cause of science : Felix Plater, who was born in 
the year 1536, richly merited the favour of his native city, 
and especially of the University, by his labours as city 
physician and professor of medicine at Basel. 

But let us turn once more to the year 1529, which, as has 
been already stated, was a time not only of ecclesiastical, but 
also of manifold political reforms. 

It is true that previous to this, in 1516, the constitution 
of Basel had received a more liberal moulding ; still further 
alterations, however, were now set on foot in the interest of 
the burghers, a circumstantial account of which would be out 


of place in this work. Suffice it to say that the suffrage 
rights of the guilds were increased, tlie power of the Great 
Council was extended, and as effectual a check as possible 
was put upon the evils attendant on nepotism. A number of 
the burghers had left the city during the disturbances. Most 
of these now returned, and were received back as citizens 
upon taking the civic oath. This interchange of oaths on the 
part of the burghers and the Government took place on the 
14th of February 1529. 

More important for us are the further steps that were taken 
for the introduction and establishment of the ecclesiastical 

On the 1st of April 1529, the first mandate of reform 
appeared, which must be regarded as the foundation of all 
subsequent mandates relative to reform in ecclesiastical 
matters and in morals, and as the basis of the matrimonial 
statutes, etc., issued at a later period. This mandate set 
forth in outline those articles of faith which, a few years 
later (in 1534), were submitted for approval to laymen and 
ministers of the word in the Confession of Basel. The articles 
of faith were followed by salutary moral regulations, which 
sufficiently demonstrate that the Eeformation contemplated 
an abolition not simply of ecclesiastical ceremonies, but also 
of moral abuses — not a mere change of dogmas, but a thorough 
amendment of life in all classes.^ In order to give weight 
to this mandate, the so-called Ban was instituted, in 1530, 
through the influence of Qi^colampadius and the mediation of 
the clergy of the other evangelical cantons, who were convened 
at Aarau for the purpose. By this arrangement it was 
provided that in every parish church three men of integrity, 
courage, and piety, should be appointed, who in connection 
with the local priests — i.e., the pastors and deacons — should 

' Here, as elsewhere, an impoitant distinction between reformations and 
revolutions forces itself upon our view ; whilst the latter, as a general thing, 
are promoters of frivolity in public morals, increasing, for instance, the number 
of tavern licences, relaxing the observance of the Sabbath, etc. , the former are 
accompanied by a dignified sedateness, or even, it may be, a censorious rigour. 


exercise a faithful and earnest superintendence over their 
fellow-parishioners. Of these three, two were to be chosen 
from the council, and the other from the congregation. Four 
such Bans were instituted, the whole city having, after the 
superfluous churches were suppressed, been divided into four 

Almost simultaneous with the Reformation of Basel, was 
that of St. Gall and Schaffhausen. The return of Vadianus 
from the disputation of Bern, where the Evangelicals were 
victorious, assisted in turning the scale in favour of the 
Reformation in St. Gall. The transition from Rome to the 
gospel here, as elsewhere, was not effected without some 
stormy scenes and the wounding of some cansciences, the 
occupants of the cloisters especially suffering much from acts 
of violence ;^ as early, however, as the summer of 1528, after 
the organization of the synod, an orderly condition of affairs 
was established. 

The course of reform at Schaffhausen was less rapid. 
Since the opponents of the gospel had succeeded in expelling 
Sebastian Hofmeister and substituting in his stead a man of 
their own party, Gallus Steiger by name, it was only with 
great caution that Erasmus Ritter had ventured to defend the 
Reformers. The behaviour of the council was equivocal. 
Here, as in Basel, one of the burgomasters (Peyer) was 
inclined to the Reformation, whilst the other (Ziegler) was 
averse to it. The former, however, steadily gained adherents 
and advanced in the confidence of the people ; and when, 
in the autumn of 1529, a body of deputies from the cities of 
Zurich, Bern, Basel, St. Gall, and Muhlhausen, made their 
appearance, and demanded an audience before both the 
councils, they received the joyful reply that " burgomasters 
and councils were unanimous in desiring to abolish the mass 
and the images, together with all other erroneous rites con- 
nected with the service of God, at the earliest possible 
moment." Under the superintendence of members of the 

1 Comp. HoTTiNGER, Forts. von Joh. v. MiiUer, vii. pp. 119 sqq. 


council, the images were at once removed from the churches 
in an orderly manner. A settlement was made with the 
cloisters ; and Erasmus might have uttered his sarcastic com- 
ment on this occasion also, since the drama was terminated 
by a double wedding. The Abbot of All Saints married a 
nun of Toss, and his sister became the wife of Erasmus 

In some portions of Switzerland — as, for instance, in Glarus 
— the two religious parties subsisted side by side. Thus, 
Valentine Tschudi, the priest and historian of Glarus/ in con- 
nection with his like-minded assistant, Jacob Heer, thought 
it best to deliver an evangelical sermon in one of the parishes 
under his charge, and to celebrate mass in the other, with a 
view to being, as far as possible, all things to all men. The 
conduct of Tschudi in this respect has been variously 
criticised, some having regarded it as indicative of luke- 
warmness, whilst others profess to discover in it a beautiful 
instance of that true tolerance which is elevated above party 
spirit. The better course is to refrain from all precipitate 
judgment in matters that pertain to the conscience of another, 
and this especially in a time of difficulty. 

So far as the condition of the Helvetic Confederacy in 
general is concerned, it must be stated that the country was 
the scene of public hostilities and of the beginnings of a 
general war of religion at an earlier period than Germany. 
Libellous writings of the grossest description were issued 
wholesale, in the authorship of which the vulgar Thomas 
Murner bore a conspicuous part. Nor did written invective, 
derisive pictures and abusive names, painted gallows and 
burning in effigy, suffice ; even the scuffles and brawls which 
frequently took place between the followers of the old and 
the new faith failed to satisfy the fierce spirit of the times ; 
rude jests began to turn into the bitterest earnest in a far 
more serious way. When the heated opponents of the 

' Not to be confounded with the well-known Swiss chronicler, Egidius 


Evangelicals could lay hold of a heretic, they made the 
unfortunate man atone for his heresy with his life. The fate 
of the hapless cobbler Hottinger, who lost his head after his 
expulsion from Zurich, has already been related. At Lucerne, 
Henry Messberg was drowned, because he had uttered some 
disparaging remarks against monks and nuns ; Hans Nagel 
was burned alive for having been instrumental in spreading 
the doctrines of Zwingle ; and the Anabaptist Hans Krlisi was 
put to death in the same manner. Most revolting of all, 
however, was the treatment which James Kaiser, called 
Schlosser, received from the inhabitants of the canton of 
Schwytz. Kaiser, who was a native of Uznach, was pastor 
of Schwerzenbach, in the canton of Zurich, and father of a 
family. Having recently been elected pastor of Oberkisch, in 
the district of Gaster, he occasionally went thither to preach, 
as it was not yet practicable for him formally to assume the 
charge of the parish. On one of these apostolic journeys, while 
passing through a wood near Uznach, he was suddenly attacked, 
dragged before the cantonal court at Schwytz, and condemned 
without further ceremony to the stake, where he ended his 
life after boldly witnessing for the truth. Zurich and Glarus 
had in vain interceded for the prisoner. They had been 
repulsed with scorn. Events like this intensified the bitter- 
ness of party spirit, and fanned the flame of religious hate. 

Two factions now stood opposed to each other in open feud. 
The five cantons of Uri, Schwytz, Unterwalden, Zug, and 
Lucerne, to which Freiburg and Solothurn in part allied 
themselves, formed an offensive and defensive union in favour 
of the ancient faith, and through the medium of commissioners 
invited Austria to join their league.^ The Evangelicals, on 
the other hand, united themselves in so-called burgh pacts 
[Burgrechte]. The first of these civic compacts was insti- 
tuted by Zurich with Constance. They were speedily joined 
by Bern and St. Gall. Basel, whose alliance had been early 

^ On the conferences at Feldkirch and AValdshut, comp. Hottingek, I.e. 
pp. 225 sqq., and Morikofer, ii. pp. 132 sq<i. 


sought, did not enter the league until the Reformation had 
gained a complete triumph within its borders ; its accession 
\vas followed by that of Biel and Miihlhausen. Such separate 
leagues within the Confederacy were indicative of anything 
but good. Each side complained that its opponent was 
guilty of infidelity to the federal cause. Meantime, the 
attitude assumed by the Confederate Cantons in relation to 
each other continually became more threatening. In this 
critical condition of affairs, Zwingle entered upon a course 
widely different from that pursued by Luther in Germany. 
While the latter, true to the maxim that differences in matters 
of faith must be decided by the word of God alone, strenu- 
ously opposed the adoption of any violent measure, and upheld 
the admissibility of self-defence even in a limited sense 
only ; in Switzerland, on the other hand, it was Zwingle who 
urged the Government and the people of Zurich to an energetic 
course of procedure, who himself drew up a plan for a battle, 
and, when the conflict broke out, claimed a place in the ranks 
of fighting men. 

This difference of conduct is explicable in part by the 
difference in the external circumstances of the two Eeformers. 
Luther regarded a recourse to arms for the defence of the 
Protestant faith in the light of a rebellion against the 
emperor and the empire, and drew back with horror at the 
very idea, because he believed every rebellion against legiti- 
mate authority to be at the same time a rebellion against 
God. Zwingle beheld in the Burgher War, caused by religious 
disagreement, a misfortune for the country — serious, indeed, 
yet unavoidable. It was no rebellion in his sight, however ; 
for although the Eeformed were accused of violating the 
Helvetic League, this accusation might with no less propriety 
l)e thrust back upon those who sought the help of Austria. 
And had not the foreign alliance, the pensions, the mercenary 
service, which Zwingle had so zealously opposed, long been 
adverse to the original idea of the Confederacy — nay, were 
they not rather treason to the Fatherland ? The Eeformed 


cantons of Switzerland, as membiers of a republic, occupied a 
different relation toward the Confederacy from that sustained 
by the Electorate of Saxony toward the German Empire and 
the emperor. 

And yet it almost seems to me as if, had the circumstances 
of Zwingie and Luther been reversed, the former would still, 
in accordance with his whole mental bent, have been hastier 
in resorting to external remedies than Luther. Had he been in 
Luther's place in Germany, Landgrave Philip of Hesse would 
assuredly not have met with the same opposition from liim as 
from the Saxon Eeformer ; while the latter, even amidst the 
difficulties in which Switzerland was placed, might perhaps 
have, withdrawn his hand from the sword, and tried once more 
to await the effect that the word of God and prayer might 
produce in a divinely-ordained time of trouble. -Not that 
Zwingie is therefore open to the reproach of having put his 
trust in an arm of flesh, or Luther chargeable with cowardice. 
Each acted in accordance with his own convictions, and in the 
manner suggested by " that singing-master in the heart " of 
whom we have heard before. Zwingie, at this juncture, as on 
other occasions, exemplifies that practical energy, combined with 
judicious calculation, which incites to immediate action, and, 
in the exercise of trust in God, assumes all responsibility for 
that which it deems itself able in its own strength to perform, 
when, upborne by a sense of right and by moral enthusiasm, 
it is drawn into a visible conflict. In Luther's character, on 
the other hand, beams forth a faith which is mighty in 
stillness ; which unhesitatingly submits to the incompre- 
hensible orderings of God ; which, in guiltless suffering, in 
patient bearing of the cross, in conflict against an invisible 
world of evil spirits, and amid a thousand temptations, aspires 
unceasingly towards one great aim, set high above all calcu- 
lations of the human understanding, and possessed of import 
for him alone who as a martyr is able to live and die for the 
heavenly riches. 

To rush upon the field of battle for the cause of the Lord 


seemed presumption to Luther, whilst he would cheerfully 
have 2one to the stake with a Huss, or have suffered himself to 
he nailed to the cross with his Master. Since Zwingle, however, 
would have been equally loath to draw back from such a 
martyr's death, his appeal to the sword may be judged, I 
believe, from a higher point of view than that usually occupied. 
His interest in politics was stronger than that of Luther, and 
in his twofold attitude as a warrior for God and his country, 
he reminds us of Joshua and Gideon of old, at the same time 
that we are constrained to admit that the mode of warfare 
prescribed in the economy of the New Covenant is totally 
different from that which was called for under the Old 

Zwingle, be it understood, believed that war afforded the 
only means of rescuing his country from her ignominious 
condition. " That peace," he wrote to his warning friends at 
Bern,^ " which many are still advocating so strongly, is war ; 
the war that I desire is peace. There is no longer any 
security possible for the truth, or those who revere it, unless 
the foundation pillars of tyranny are overturned. Do not lose 
confidence in me because I feel compelled to speak thus ; 
with God's help I will continue worthy of your trust." It 
must needs awaken feelings of regret within us when we see 
him — a messenger of peace, a minister of the gospel — still 
insisting upon war at a time when all others were eager for 
peace. Since, however, almost every vigorous character 
exhibits some hard rock of offence, to overstep which all 
efforts are fruitless, — since Luther has shown us a sharp 
angle of this kind in the eucharistic controversy, why should 
we not tolerate in Zwingle a harshness which, it may be, was 
indispensable in circumstances with which we are insufficiently 
acquainted ? Those who in troublous times are advocates of 
peace, are not always true friends of their country ; and even 
admitting that they were, none the less are theij friends who, 
not through lust of fighting, but from an earnest and manly 

1 Comp. HoTTINGER, l.c. p. 244. 


conviction, press for war. Even a minister of the gospel — and 
especially one who holds not his own person back from the 
conflict — may recommend measures of apparent severity 
to clear his conscience from the reproach of a base fear of 
man. Whether such severity, such extreme measures, were 
necessary at the period which we are discussing, I will not 
venture to decide. The result, indeed, has shown that the 
cause of the gospel was in no way benefited thereby. 
External consequences, however, are not always infallible 
guides to a right judgment. And supposing even that 
Zwingle erred in his choice of means, far be it from us to test 
the intentions of the man by his conduct's result, that result 
being shaped by the hand of God alone. 

But we will not anticipate the course of our history. Let 
us examine into the progress of affairs. 

The unjust capture and cruel execution of Kaiser had first 
excited general indignation against the five cantons. Disputes 
relative to the Abbot of St. Gall, etc., intensified the feeling of 
animosity. Hostilities began by a cutting off supplies on 
either side, and both parties finally took up arms. Zurich 
was foremost in manifesting a disposition for war ; Bremgarten 
and Muri were occupied, and troops were stationed in the 
district of Gaster and the valley of the Ehine. Bern, though 
indignant at the people of Unterwalden, who had succoured the 
rebellious Ober-Haslithalers, endeavoured to mediate a peace ; 
on seeing the preparations of the opposite side, however, this 
canton, like Basel, St. Gall, and Mlihlhausen, also contributed 
its auxiliaries to the Evangelical troops. The five cantons 
meantime had not been inactive. While Schwytz, Uri, and 
Unterwalden drew themselves up at the foot of the Brunig 
mountains against Bern, the banner of Lucerne was borne, under 
the leadership of Magistrate Hug, against Muri. Kappel had 
been chosen as the headquarters of the Zurichers, whose army 
Zwingle accompanied not simply in the capacity of chaplain, 
as Bullinger states, and as is generally believed on his authority, 
but as an armed combatant. Commander Schmid of Kiiss- 


nacht, more peaceably disposed than Zwingle, was chaplain. 
A contemporary chronicle by Bernard Weiss says : ^ " Master 
Conrad Sclimid was appointed to preach to the troops while 
in the field, for it was not desired that Master Ulrich Zwingle 
should go to the war, as he had many bitter enemies on the 
opposing side ; he would not stay at home, however, but 
mounted a horse and bore a fine halberd on his shoulder." '"^ 
The rival forces might have numbered collectively about 
30,000 men had all of both sides been present; without 
waiting, however, for the accession of the still absent troops, 
Zurich sent a trumpeter to proclaim to the five cantons the 
rupture of the federal alliance. The vanguard of the 
Evangelical army was already in marching order, though the 
frontier had not yet been crossed, when there came up from 
Baar, Landamman Aebli of Glarus, a man who was universally 
esteemed, and who, being possessed of the ancient Helvetic 
spirit, was averse to the system of foreign pensions. With 
unfeigned and deep emotion, the newcomer advocated peace. 
Excellent, he declared, were the equipments of the warriors 
on both sides, but might not a peace still be possible between 
those who had so often hazarded their lives side by side ? 
" Worthy and beloved gentlemen of Zurich, for God's sake 
avert the dissolution, the downfall, of the old Confederacy ! " 

It having been resolved to defer the attack and procure 
fresh orders, Zwingle severely reproached the Landamman. 

" Gossip Amman," said he, " thou wilt have to render a 
reckoning to God for this mediation. Whilst our enemies are 
in a sack and unarmed, they are lavish of good words, and 
thou believest them. But when they are armed they will have 
no mercy on us." But Aebli calmly answered, " Dear Ulrich, 
I trust in God that all will yet be well." Steps were now 
actually taken to secure peace, Aarau being appointed as the 

' HoTTiNGER, I.e. p. 251, note 34. 

^ Thomas Plater, among others, describes this expedition as an eye-witness. 
He served his master, Stahelin, on that occasion in the capacity of squire, and 
carried his armour for him, but from that time withdrew from his old relation 
to his master and the ropemaking trade. 


meeting-place of the two parties. Zwingle shook his head 
at this arrangement. "For God's sake, gracious lords," he 
wrote to Zurich, " do not suffer yourselves to be moved, even 
by tears ! Upon your manly resolution, all our future weal 

Intense as was the feeling of exasperation on both sides, 
some remnants of the old cordiality still survived among the 
people, and evidenced themselves upon occasion in a striking 

Both parties were strictly forbidden to cross the frontier 
during the continuance of the truce. The outposts, however, 
frequently met and engaged in neighbourly converse and good- 
humoured raillery. Upon one occasion some of the men of 
the five cantons placed a great bowl full of milk on the 
boundary line, and called to the Zurichers that they had milk 
but nothing to break in it. Immediately " some honest 
fellows " of Zurich ran and crumbled some bread in the milk. 
Then every man threw himself down on his own ground, and 
all ate together from the common dish. If one chanced to 
reach over the middle of the bowl, another would playfully 
rap him over the knuckles with his spoon and admonish him 
not to cross the frontier. Such true-hearted pleasantry on the 
part of individuals in the midst of the white heat of passion 
which dominated the mass, was so affecting a sight to the 
stranger spectator, that Jacob Sturm, governor of Strassburg 
and one of the umpires, beautifully exclaimed, " You Swiss 
are a wonderful people ! Even when you are at variance, 
you are still one, and your ancient friendship is never 
forgotten ! " 

The commissioners now entered upon the business of 
mediation at Aarau, but subsequently removed to Steinhausen, 
in the canton of Zug, for the purpose of being nearer to both 
parties. A peace ^ was effected on the 26th of July 1529. 

' See the documents relating to this peace as presented in Escher and 
Hottinger's Archiv fur schiveizerische Geschkhte U7id Landeskunde, Zuricli, 
1827, one vol. 


The free preaching of the gospel, the dissohition of the alliance 
■with Ferdinand of Austria, the abolition of the pensions, and 
the cessation of insult on both sides, formed the main stipula- 
tions of the treaty. Bern, which had witli great unwillingness 
been prevailed upon to join in the war, did not conceal its 
delight at the peace which had been brought about. Zurich 
also, however, gave orders for festivities at the different guild- 
halls, and further celebrated the occasion by a discharge of 
cannon at the Lindenhof.^ A general jubilation seemed to 
have taken the place of the war cry. But amid all these 
rejoicings, Zwingle went about with serious mien, casting 
gloomy glances into the future. He gave expression to his 
feelings in the following hymn : — 

" Herr, nun heb' den Wagen selb ! Widrum crweck, 

Schelb (scliiet) wird sust Die dich 

All unser fart. Liebliabend inniglit'li. 

Das briiclit Lust ,, ^J.■,~ , ,, -r,., , , ., 

^ ,,^. , , ' Hilt, dass alle Bitterkeit 

Dem Widerpart, m i • i r ,c x 

^. -. , '■ Scneide ler (fern), 

Die dich TT J u 4. •■ 

,, , ^ e r T X. Und alte truv 

V erachtn so irelenlich. ,„., , 


" Gott, erho den Namen din Und werde niiv : 

In der straf Dass wir 

Der biisen BiJck ! Ewig lobsingend dir. " - 

Dine Schaf 

Unpleasant though it may have been to him to take the 
position of a prophet of ill, he could not refrain from giving 
vent to his apprehensions in the pulpit, declaring that he 
feared " the peace would sooner or later cause men to wring 
their hands." It was, indeed, of no long duration, and Zwingle 

1 See Thomas Plater's description of the proceedings. 

2 [" Do Thou direct Thy chariot, Lord, That slumbering lie within 

And guide it at Thy will ; Thy fold, and curb with Thy right hand 

Without Thy aid our strength is vain, The rage of Satan's furious band. 

And useless all our skill. 

Look down upon Thy saints brought low, " ^"'''^ -^o^" ^hy peace, and banish strife. 

And prostrate laid before the foe. ^""^ bitterness depart ; 

Revive the spirit of the past 

" Beloved Pastor, who hast saved In every Switzer's heart : 

Our souls from death and sin, Then shall Thy Church for ever sing 

Uplift Thy voice, awake Thy sheep. The iiraises of her heavenly King." 

— From D'Aubigne'.s Hist, of the lief. (William Collins, Glasgow and London), 
vol. iv. p. 317. It is to this edition of M. D'Aubigne's work that reference is 
most frequently made in the present volume. — Tr..] 


himself became the sacrifice of his own zeal. But before 
narrating the fresh outbreak and sad ending of the Switzer 
War, let us contemplate a conflict of another nature, which was 
inrsuccessfully seeking its adjustment at almost this very 







AFTEE having separately considered the two currents of 
the German and the Swiss Eeforniation, from the time of 
the Peasant War to the first War of Cappel, we have arrived 
at a point where these two currents meet — not, however, to 
unite and flow peacefully on together with doubled power, 
but, after mingling their tides for an instant in wild commo- 
tion, again to divide and pursue their respective ways in 
separate channels. 

Before surveying the disputants as they stand ranged 
against each other at the conference of Marburg, it will 
be necessary for us to resume our narrative of those 
controversial publications whose beginnings we have already 

We concluded our account of the eucharistic controversy, 
in chapter xv., with CEcolampadius' friendly admonition to 
Luther to strive after a more moderate and dignified tone. 
This advice was, however, unheeded. On the contrary, 
Luther now issued one of his most violent publications, under 
the following title : That the Words, " This is my Body" still 
hold good, etc. 

Zwingle had carefully refrained from attacking that " very 
learned man, Martin Luther," but had, in general terms, 
expressed his disapprobation of the passionate tone which 


had characterised the controversy from its commencement.^ 
Luther thereupon issued his tractate Against the Fanatics'^ 
in which he deports himself like a " raving Orestes," as Capito 
calls him. That " master of a thousand wiles " [^Tauscnd- 
kunstlcr~\, the devil, comes in, as usual, for a share of the 
writer's reprobation, the Eeformer charging him with having 
produced the present disturbance in the Church. Luther 
professes to give up all hope of converting Zwingle and his 
adherents, and declares that their sin is too heinous to be 
forgiven. Christ Himself, he says, did not convert a 
single high priest. He, however, undertakes the present 
refutation for the sake of the weak and simple. He begs to 
be excused from listening to all further recommendations of 
brotherly love. Such love as had been frequently enjoined 
upon him was, he declared, an accursed love. To his mind 
it was suggestive of the case of one who should first murder 
the father, mother, wife, and child of another, and then say, 
" Be at peace, dear friends ; let us love one another ; it is no 
such great affair as to cause us to disagree." It was thus, he 
said, that the fanatics \_Schwarmgeistcr'\ had treated him ; they 
had slain God his Father in His words, and had, moreover, 
murdered his mother, Christianity, and his brethren, and now 
they desired that there should be love between him and 
them ! It is saddening to observe the lengths to which 
Luther suffered himself to be carried by passion ; earnest- 
minded though he was, he did not shrink from the greatest 
irreverence in seeking to throw ridicule upon his opponent's 
interpretation of Scripture. Zwingle's assumption that is 
is equivalent to signifies, Luther declares to be as arbitrary 
as " if I [Luther] were to deny that God created lieaven and 
earth, and, when some one came to me and held up before 
my eyes the words of Moses, ' In the beginning God created 

^ On Zwingle's minor writings, such as his communication to the canon Jaeoh 
Edlibach (1526), comp. Morikofer, ii. p. 201. 

■- Dass die Worte Christi : "Das ist mein Leib," w. s. iv. noch/estskhtn. 
Wider die Schwarmgelster. 



heaven and earth,' I were to explain the text in this wise : 
' God ' is equivalent to ' cuckoo,' ' created ' means ' ate,' 
'heaven and eartli ' means ' the sparrow, feathers and all;' so 
that the words of Moses would run thus : ' In the beginning 
the cuckoo ate the sparrow, feathers and all.' " That, says 
Luther, would be a fine way to treat the Holy Scriptures. 

Zwingle had taught that the body of Christ could not be 
in the bread of the Eucharist, because that body is in heaven, 
at the right hand of God. Luther, accordingly, accused 
Zwingle of conceiving of heaven " as such a place as we tell 
children it is, — with a golden throne in it, and Christ sitting 
by the Father in a chorister's gown, with a golden crown on 
His head, — as the painters depict heaven." Luther con- 
ceived of the " right hand of God " as everywhere, — in every 
leaf of every tree, — and from this he argued the ubiquity of 
Christ's body. He, however, denied the accusation that he 
maintained the local presence of Christ's body in the bread : 
" We poor sinners are not quite so foolish as to believe that 
the body of Christ is in the bread in tlie gross and palpable 
way in which bread is in a basket, or wine in a goblet, as the 
fanatics affirm of us, delighting themselves in our folly ; but 
we believe without more ado that His body is where His 
own words place it : ' This is my body.' The fathers and we 
say sometimes that Christ's body is in the bread simply 
because His body is there ; but we care not whether a man 
say ' it is in the bread,' or ' it is the bread,' or ' it is where 
the bread is,' or however else he chooses ; w^e will not 
dispute about words (?). God has more ways of having one 
thing in another than the gross way in which bread is in a 
box, wine is in a cask, or money is in the pocket. Levi was 
in the loins of Abraham ; light and colour and all that we see 
are said to be in our eyes, and thus even heaven and earth 
7 nay be in the eye. In the same manner, trees and fruits are 
in their respective germs and seeds." It will be seen that 
Luther here leaps from rigid realism into spiritualizing 
idealism, but immediately after this he intrenched himself 


once more in the former. Zwingie had referred to Christ's 
saying that " it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth 
nothing." Luther replied that it was not the place of reason 
to investigate as to what things are profitable or the contrary. 
He maintained, indeed, that there was great profit in the 
doctrine which he defended, for the very reason that it is an 
offence to reason, and a preventive against its haughty self- 

Zwingie replied to this writing of Luther's in another 
publication.^ In antithesis to Luther, who opened his tractate 
with the devil, Zwingie thought that he could commence more 
worthily by wisliing Luther prosperity and salvation through 
Christ, in order that his opponent might perceive that Christ 
dwelt in the heart of each of them by faith, and not by 
eating. He expressed his confidence that God's word wonld 
at last prevail, to the exclusion of such terms as " fanatic, 
devil, knave, heretic, murderer, rioter, dissembler, and hypocrite, 
— trotz, hotz, hlotz, hlitz, clundcr, po, pu, pa, 'plump, — and the like 
abusive and opprobrious words." Luther's stinging declara- 
tion that Christ never converted a high priest, he returns upon 
its author, with the advice to seek for the high priest in his 
own bosom; for, said he, " we are all of us but poor, untaught, 
doltish, petty enthusiasts." The sober-minded critic strove 
to meet his angry opponent with cool irony, though involun- 
tarily Zwingle's own blood boiled. The first ebullition of 
passion being over, however, he went calmly and thoroughly 
to work. The controversy respected not only the Eucharist, 
but also the person of Christ — the relation of the two 
natures, the divine and the human, to each other. Zwingie 
admitted the presence, in the Scriptures, of certain passages 
that affirm somewhat concerning; the divine nature which, 

^ Dass diese Worte Jesu Christi : "Das is myn lychnam, der /lir iich 
hingegeben wird," ewiglich den alien einigen Sinn haben werdend, und M. Luther 
mit sinem letzten Buch sine?!, und des Papstes (!). Sinn mit gelehrt und beivcihrt 
hat ; Huldrychen Zwingli's christUche Antwurt, Zurich, Froschauer, 1527. Tho 
book has a preface addressed to the Elector John of Saxony {Deutsche Schriften, 
vol. iii. p. 16 sqq.). 


taken strictly, is applicable to the human nature also, and 
vice versa. This he called a change [" AhtauschuTKj " oclcr 
" Gegenwcclisd "] of natures {aXkoi(jii(XL<i). After expatiating at 
some length upon this point, he closes with these words : 
" Herewith, dear Luther, I submit to you my humble request 
that you will no longer rage in this matter as you have done 
hitherto, for if you are Christ's, we also are His, It is not 
seemly that we should employ against each other any other 
weapon than the word of God, Use that therefore with 
Christian discretion, and we will do the same. May the 
truth be victorious. Amen." 

But Luther continued to rage. In the year 1528, his 
Bekenntniss von Ahendmahl Christi appeared. This work, 
which is also called the Great Confession, bears for its motto 
the following words : " Preserve me in integrity and 
uprightness" {\_Schlecht und rccht hehute micli], Ps. xxv. 21). 
The tractate is powerfully written, though characterised, like 
everything adverse to Zwingle that flowed from the pen of 
Luther, by excessive vehemence of diction and a certain 
self-exaltation. The remarks on the use of the trope, in 
Scripture as well as in ordinary discourse, are not lacking in 
ingenuity. Well-chosen examples demonstrate the loss of 
force which in many cases would follow the interpretation of 
is by signifies. Thus, for instance, John the Baptist is 
Elijah, means more than he signifies Elijah ; it could better 
be said inversely, Elijah signifies John. The lower is 
significant of the higher, not the converse, Christ is the 
Vine (the vine, however, can be said to signify Christ). That 
which Zwingle and fficolampadius called a trope, Luther 
designated as a " word-renewal," a raising of the word into a 
new sense. When Christ is called a Flower, the meaning is 
not simply that He signifies a flower : He is in very deed a 
flower (as we would say the flower of mankind), though He 
is such in a higher sense than the flower of the field.^ 

' Some of the examples cited by Luther are of a more ignoble sort. AVhen, 
he remarks, in speaking of a mi>er, we say lie in a eur, we do not mean that he 


Christ's words, Luther continues, are not mere sigyis [Bcutcl- 
vjorte] ; they are deeds and commands [Thdtelioorte und 

It was with special violence that Luther attacked Zwiugle's 
doctrine concerning the two natures in Christ, his teaching in 
regard to what he styled the " Alloiosis " [aXKoiwaL^i]. Luther 
called this doctrine a devilish disguise, against which all should 
be on their guard ; for, says he, it represents Christ to us as 
having done no more, with all His life and suffering, than any 
mere saint. That " old storm-raiser " Madam Eeason, he 
continues, is the " grandmother of Alloiosis," for she says 
" Divinity cannot suffer and die." In reality, however, Luther, 
like Zwingle, assumed that statements are frequently made 
concerning a whole, which when taken strictly are applicable 
only to a part/ He contended, however, that this form of 
speech, as well when employed in relation to the personality 
of Christ as in other instances of its use, should not be 
termed " alloiosis," but " synecdoche." In no instance did 
Luther swerve one hair's-breadth from his doctrine in regard 
to the ubiquity of the body of Christ. God, he declares, 
has many ways of being in a place.^ It is not admissible, 
Luther proceeds, arbitrarily to strip the Divinity of its 
liumanity. God does not don and doff" humanity " as a peasant 
puts on or lays aside his coat." " Therefore " (he thus addresses 
Zwingle) " away with thee, thou gross fanatic, with thy 
dronish thoughts ! If thou art capable of no better ideas on 
such a subject, go sit by the stove and roast apples and 
pears, and leave this matter in peace." Towards the end of 
the book Luther utters a complete confession of faith, full of 
deep religious feeling, and declares his intention to abide by 

signifies a cur ; he is, in fact, a cur — a cur in his ways, he has the nature of a 
cur. Thus it may also be said Luther is a second Huss, Zwingle is another 
Korah, fficolampadiiis is a new Abiram. (Here Luther's modesty deserted him.) 

' Thus we say, "The king's son is wounded," when we mean that a leg of 
the king's son is wounded ; or, " Peter is grey," when only his hair is grey. 

- Luther affirms the same thing of the devil. The latter, he says, can be in 
a whole city, or he can be in a tankard, in a box, or in a nut-shell. And again, 
a whole legion of devils may be in a man. 


tliis confession to his dying day. If, he remarked, he should 
ever, in the pangs of death, alter it, such alteration might be 
regarded as invalid, and instigated by the devil. " So help 
me my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." 

This powerful controversial publication of Luther called 
forth the combined opposition of Zwingle and QEcolampadius.^ 
Zwingle, who until tliis time had always treated Luther with 
great respect, responded at last to the harsh language of the 
Saxon Eeformer with asperities of his own. He tells him 
he (Luther) is sick with a " word fever ; " he accuses him of 
falling back upon indefinite and obscure expressions, and says 
that Luther would fain " envelop himself in the smoke of his 
ov/n violence, and thus make his escape from argument." 
" In reading this book," he continues, " I feel as I should do 
if I saw a sow in my flower garden, so foully and untheologi- 
cally does the man speak of God and sacred things." Luther, 
he observes, commenced one of his books with the devil, and 
has ended another in the same way.^ " Thus it is that God 
decrees that when we would be wise without His word, we 
become fools." 

We have been thus circumstantial in our account of this 
unedifying controversy, for the reason that it is highly 
characteristic both of the two men who were principally 
engaged in it, and of the age in which they lived. The 
narrative will also serve to make manifest the difficulty that, 
after the publication on either side of such productions as the 

^ Ueher Dr. M. LuthersBuch: Bekenntniss gennant ; zwo Antworten Joh. Eco- 
hmpadii unci Hiddrkh ZwinrjUs. Both works were prepared in great haste. 
(Ecolampadius began his on St. John's day (24th June), and Zvvingle's was com- 
menced on the 1st of July 1528. They were issued simultaneously at the time of 
the autumnal fair, being, "for the sake of brevity and convenience," printed 
together. Tl^ey were dedicated to the Elector John of Saxony and the Landgrave 
Philip of Hesse. In ZicinglVs Werke, vol. ii. chap. ii. p. 94, may be found his 
Ansiver alone, without that of (Ecolampadius. 

2 Zwingle makes the following remark in reference to the close of Luther's 
CoiifesHton : "The most charming thing about the book is that the author 
concludes the confession of his faith like the parson who, after soundly rating 
his flock, exclaimed, ' Look you, if you and I do not change our ways, we 
shall all go to the devil. So help us all, God the Father, Son, and Holy 


foregoing, necessarily attended the work of reconciliation, 
which, by the arrangement of the Landgrave Philip, was now 
to be undertaken at the Conference of Marliirg} 

Luther and Melanchthon anticipated from the outset no 
good results from this conference. They even sought to 
prevent it from taking place, and Luther declared that he 
attended it on compulsion. He spoke of the dishonesty 
(improhitas) of the landgrave. Luther had already so accustomed 
himself to the idea that the Zwinglians formed a distinct 
party in the Church, as to express the opinion that if theij 
were admitted to the conference, the Papists also should be 
allowed to debate. On the other hand, the council of Zurich 
was doubtful as to whether Zwingle should be permitted to 
go to Marburg. Fears were entertained as to his safety, 
since he would be obliged to travel through a hostile region. 
But Zwingle was resolved to go. He placed entire confi- 
dence in the Landgrave Philip. At the desire of Basel, which 
was to send CEcolampadius, Bern was also invited to despatch 
a deputy to the conference ; it accordingly sent Berthold 
Haller. Zwingle left Zurich in company with Eudolph 
Collin, professor of Greek, and under the escort of a messenger 
of the council. On taking leave of his wife, he, from a 
tender desire to spare her anxiety, mentioned only that he 
was going to Basel. At the latter place he was joined by 
CEcolampadius, who, like himself, was accompanied by a 
deputy from the council, Ulric Frei by name. At Strassburg 
the little band was further augmented by the accession of 
Bucer, Hedio, and the Burgomaster Jacob Sturm. On the 

' See ScHMiTT, Das ReUr/ionsgesprdcJi in Marhurg, 1840. Sources of informa- 
tion relative to the conference are the reports of eye-witnesses, such, on the side 
of the Zwinglian party, as Collin {0pp. Zwirifjlu, iii. chap. ii. pp. 173 sqq.), CEco- 
lampadius (in a letter to Haller ; there is also a manuscript report by Frei, a 
messenger of the council, in the church archives of Basel) ; Bucer (in Simler's 
Sammlumjen, ii. 2). Comp. Bullinger, ii. p. 233, and Hospinian, Historia 
Sacramentaria ad an. 1529. On the Lutheran side, Melanchthon, Justus 
.ToNAs, Brenz, Osiander (Corp. Ref. i. pp. 1095 sqq.). Comp. several letters of 
Luther, especially those from Gerbellius to his wife, to Agricola, and to J. Propst 
(De Wette). 


Hunsriick, in the county of Katzenellenbogen, a troop of 
Hessian horsemen, forty in number, was in waiting to convoy 
the travellers to their journey's end. Jacob von Taubenheim, 
the deputy of the landgrave, welcomed the embassy in the 
name of his master. At St. Goar they were further greeted 
hy the whole body of officials of that place and its vicinity. 
On the 29th of September they arrived at Marburg, where 
they met with a friendly reception from the landgrave. The 
Wittenbergers, consisting of Luther, Melanchthon, Justus 
-Jonas, and Bugenhagen, made their appearance on the fol- 
lowing day. Stephen Agricola of Augsburg, Andrew Osiander 
of Nuremberg, and John Brenz of Schwabisch-Hall, also 
visited jNIarburg on this occasion. As a matter of course, 
Francis Lambert, the Eeformer of Hesse, was not absent. 
A large number of theologians from far and near resorted 
to the " Episcopal Synod," as Justus Jonas termed the 
assembly. Philip displayed the most lavish hospitality, 
" lodging and entertaining his guests in a right princely 
manner." In regard to admission to the conference, how- 
ever, it was necessary to keep within the bounds of modera- 
tion, and entrance was denied to Karlstadt, among others.^ 
A solemn poetical greeting was extended to the assembly 
by the learned Enricius Cordus, who admonished the dis- 
putants to strive after unity. Sermons were also preached 
by some of the guests previous to the opening of the 
conference. Luther delivered a discourse on Christian 
Tiighteousness, and Zwingle preached on the subject of 

And now for the conference itself. The landgrave had 
prudently arranged that the most fiery leaders of the con- 

^ MORIKOFEK, ii. p. 231. 

^ From this sermon was evolved Zwingle's treatise, De Providentla Dei {0pp. 
lat. iv. 2), in which the doctrine of election is discussed. That doctrine did not 
then constitute a point of difterence between the Lutheran and (as it was subso- 
r[Ufntly denominated) the Reformed system of theology. Nor do we find that 
Luther objected to the subject- matter of the doctrines ; he censured its form 
simply as too erudite, and charged Zwingle with having unnecessarily intro- 
duced into it much Latin, Greek, ai;d Hebrew. 


troversy should not immediately come in contact with each 
other. Private debates were first to take place between 
Luther and the gentler CEcolampadius, and between Zwingle 
and Melanchthon. The greater discussion, to which none but 
princes and men of learning were admitted (ordinary indi- 
viduals and many of high rank being excluded ^), took place on 
the 2d of October, in the great Gothic hall of the castle, in the 
presence of from fifty to sixty princes, counts, and ambassadors. 
The conference was opened at the early hour of six in the 
morning. Chancellor Feige delivered a discourse admonishing 
the disputants " to strive, by all equitable ways and means, for 
the speedy ending of this burdensome and most disadvan- 
tageous dissension, and for the establishment of a durable 
union." Before the contested point of the Lord's Supper was 
touched upon, other articles of faith were discussed. Zwingle 
and his followers were suspected of entertaining heretical ideas 
in regard to Christ, original sin, justification, etc. It was 
necessary that they should first indicate their doctrine in 
respect of these points, after which the eucharistic disputation 
commenced. Zwingle and Melanchthon had, in their pre- 
liminary debate, come to an agreement in so far as that 
they had both admitted a spiritual eating of the body of 
Christ ; but upon the question as to whether this spiritual 
eating is or is not, at the same time, a corporeal eating, 
they found it impossible to agree. Melanchthon, usually so 
yielding, was in tliis instance at least as unbending as 
Luther. The latter, as is well known, wrote the word ecrTi 
(is) on the table in front of him, and during the course 
of the argument constantly pointed to it as an irrefutable 
divine utterance. He demanded an unconditional submission 
to the authority of this word. If God, he said, should com- 
mand him to eat crab-apples, he would eat them without 
asking why. He maintained that Christ's body is in the 
bread just as the sword is in the scabbard, or as beer is in 
the tankard (this in opposition to his own former utterances). 
^ According to BuUinger. 


When Zwingle protested against this idea, Luther replied, 
" I will have nothing to do with mathematics," whereupon 
Zwingje simply answered that he had himself said nothing 
about mathematics. A sincfular misunderstandinj? incensed 
Luther against Zwingle. The latter, who had brought up the 
sixth chapter of John in defence of the spiritual partaking of 
the Lord's Supper, remarked, " That passage breaks your neck, 
doctor." Luther, apprehending the words literally, retorted 
that they were in Hesse, not in Switzerland, and that his 
neck was consequently in no danger ; upon this, Zwingle 
hastened to assure him that he had simply made use of a 
Swiss expression denoting a lost cause. The disputation 
would have been continued for a longer time had the dis- 
putants not been driven away by the outbreak of a malady 
called the English sweating sickness. The landgrave had 
spared no pains to reconcile the two parties. The conference 
having closed on the 3d of October, private interviews took 
place on the following day. In vain had Zwingle, with 
tears in his eyes, declared that there were no peojDle on 
earth with whom he would more gladly be at peace than 
the Wittenbergers. Luther could not understand this. The 
idea that it is possible to cherish a brotherly love for persons 
whose creed is different from our own seemed to him utterly 
preposterous. In such a case, he thought that neither party 
could attach much importance to its own belief. He could 
conceive of no other love towards a doctrinal opponent than 
that which is due even to a personal enemy. It was in 
vain that Zwingle offered Luther his hand ; the Saxon Re- 
former put it from him with the words, " You have another 

In order, however, that the conference might not be entirely 
fruitless, the two parties came to an agreement on the 3d 
of October in reference to fourteen articles, none of which 
had any bearing upon the Lord's Supper.^ In regard to the 

^ The articles were as follows : — 1. The Trinity ; 2. Incarnation of Christ ; 
3. Birth, Passion, Piesurrcction, and Ascension of Christ ; 4. Original Sin (in 


fifteenth article — that relating to the Eucharist — the follow- 
ing was agreed upon : — 1. That it should be received in both 
kinds ; 2. That the sacrifice of the mass is inadmissible ; 
3. That the sacrament of the altar is a sacrament of the 
body and blood of Christ, and that the partaking of it is 
salutary. "And although," it was further stated, " we are not 
at this time agreed as to whether the true body and blood of 
Christ are pliysicallij present in the bread and wine, we re- 
commend that either party manifest a Christian love to the 
other (to the extent that the conscience of every man shall 
permit), and that both parties entreat God Almighty to 
confirm us by His Spirit in the right doctrine. Amen." 
These articles were signed on the 4th of October by the 
theologians of both sides.^ The assembly dispersed. Zwingle, 
after an absence of more than six weeks, returned to Zurich. 
Though the conference had not been productive of the desired 
result, it was not altogether fruitless. Francis Lambert, who 
had hitherto been of the Lutheran persuasion, was from 
that time a decided adherent of Zwingle. From his death- 
bed, upon which he was soon after laid, he wrote [February 
1530] to his friends in Strassburg on the subject, and de- 
sired that his letter might be published, in order that the 
whole world might know that he had changed his opinion 
in regard to the Lord's Supper. He declares, concerning 
his personal relation to the controversy, that he had, from 
the very commencement of the latter, besought God to de- 
liver him from the maze of opinions in which he was entangled ; 
that he had conscientiously examined the antagonistic views ; 
and though he had at first been of Luther's opinion, he had 
never brought himself to regard the opposite party as delivered 

regard to which, however, Zwingle entertained a different opinion from Luther's) ; 
5. Redemption ; 6 and 7. Justification by Faith ; 8. Operation of the Holy 
Ghost through the Written Word and the Sacraments ; 9. Baptism ; 10. Good 
Works as the Fruit of Faith; IL Confession and Absolution; 12. Civil 
Authority ; 13. Tradition ; 14. Necessity of Infant Baptism. See Heite, 
Die 15 Marburrjer Artikel nach dem Original ver oJfhitUcht, Marburg, 1848. 

1 Especially by Luther, Melanchthon, Jonas, Osiander, and Brenz, on the one 
side, and by fficolampadius, Zwingle, Bucer, and Hedio, on the other. 


over to tlie devil. He had finally resolved that he would 
never, in his searches for truth, inquire v)liose any particular 
doctrine was, hut rather ivhat it was : " Rid thee of all men — 
ay, cast even Luther from thee, that they may not prove 
hindrances to thee." Such was his principle. He relates 
further that he took up his Bible, with a prayer for God's aid, 
and examined the controverted question as though he had 
never read a word concerning it ; and in so doing, the sixth 
chapter of John made a decisive impression on his mind, so 
that he had arrived at the conviction that a carnal eating of 
Christ's body profits nothing — Christ's w^ords are spirit and 
life. Christ is indeed present, in power and effect, in the 
sacrament of the altar, he continued, but not in a local and 
corporeal manner.^ 

Of special importance, as a result of the conference, is the 
fact that the landgrave himself was now won over to Zwingle's 
way of thinking, and it is probable that nothing save political 
scruples withheld him from more decidedly embracing the 
cause of the Swiss Eeformer.^ 

The congress of Schmalkalden had been appointed to meet 
on the 13 th of December, but, in consequence of the conference 
of Marburg, it was held on the 29th of November. Philip 
exerted himself to the utmost to bring the cities of Ulm and 
Strassburg into the alliance of the Evangelicals, their admis- 
sion having been opposed on account of the views entertained 
by them in regard to the Lord's Supper. The landgrave's 
efforts were, however, unavailing. The adherents of Luther, 
on the other hand, clamoured for the universal acceptance of 
that pure doctrine whose articles, at the suggestion of the 
Elector of Saxony, were submitted for approval at Schwabach, 
and afterwards, with but few alterations, adopted at Torgau. 
But it was not only from doctrinal considerations that Luther 

' Hassenkamp, I.e. 

^ See MoKiKOFEii, ii. p. 243, for a letter of the landgrave to Zwingle. Luther 
(lid all in his power to prevent Philip from forming any connection with the 
Swiss. Conip. Letter 1216 (De Wette, iv.). 


scrupled to conclude an alliance to wliicli circumstances might 
impart a warlike colouring. Luther, who was from principle 
opposed to anything that bore the slightest resemblance to a 
revolt against civil authority, as vested in the person of the 
emperor or elsewhere, declared to the elector that he would 
rather die ten deaths than have his conscience burdened with 
the thought that the gospel had been an occasion of any 
bloodshed or damage. The Evangelicals should be sufferers 
rather than avengers of themselves ; the Christian must 
bear the cross ; prayers and entreaties would accomplish more 
than defiance.^ To rise against the emperor seemed to him 
as contrary to reason and to law as for the burgomaster of 
Torgau to stir up his people against the elector. 

In September of the year 1529 the emperor had gone to 
Italy to be crowned by the pope. On the 20th of the preced- 
ing June he had concluded the Treaty of Barcelona with the 
pontiff, and in the following August had established the Peace 
of Cambrai with the King of France, so that he was now 
at leisure. The Turks alone were disquieting the empire 
afresh. It being necessary on their account, as well as by 
reason of the prevalent religious contentions, to hold a Diet, 
the emperor, writing from Bologna in January 1530, con- 
voked the imperial Estates to meet at Augsburg on the 8th 
of April. The summons was couched in terms of moderation 
and gentleness. The meeting was postponed until the 1st of 
May, and some time elapsed even after that date before the 
Estates were assembled. Luther desired that much good might 
result from the deliberations of the Diet. " Let us look to it," 
he wrote, " that we pray with all diligence and earnestness, and 
beseech God to let His grace attend upon the present Diet, and 
to bestow His Holy Spirit with power upon our good and pious 
Emperor Charles, who is sitting like an innocent lamb (?) in 
the midst of a multitude of dogs, swine, and devils, to the 
end that he may establish peace and good order in German 

1 Comp. Luther's Letters (De Wette), 1170, 1191. 


The Elector of Saxony repaired to the Diet, followed by 
a numerous train. The theologians who accompanied him 
were Luther, Justus Jonas, Spalatin, Melanchthon, and 
Agricola. During the journey Luther preached at Weimar 
in Passion AVeek, and in Coburg at Easter. The elector 
.spent some little time at the latter city, and there he left 
Luther, not daring to take him with him to Augsburg. He 
feared that the appearance of this man, from whose head 
the ban had never been lifted, would create a greater stir 
among his adversaries at Augsburg than had been excited on 
a former occasion by his presence at Worms. 

Luther's sojourn at Coburg forms, in some measure, a 
companion piece to his abode in the Wartburg. At Coburg, 
as at tlie Wartburg, he dates his letters from " the wilder- 
ness," from " the region of birds," or, inverting the letters 
which compose the name of the town, from " Gruboc." In 
l)oth places he suffered much from melancholy. Already he 
began to look about him for a place where his body might 
repose when the Lord should take his soul to Himself. The 
supposition that he composed his hymn, Ein fcstc Burg ist 
v.nscr Gott, in this time of trial is indeed untenable,^ but 
it is certain that he then sought refuge once and again in 
that firm stronghold of whom the hymn speaks. It is also 
said that he sang this hymn, which he had previously com- 
posed, under his window to the sound of the lute. He 
would stand for hours at the window, and there it was that 
he was wont to pray.' Matthesius compares him to Moses, 
who, while the people of Israel fought with the Amalekites, 
held up his hands to heaven for them in supplication and 
blessing. Luther prayed at this time after this fashion : " O 
Eather, preserve the framers and professors of the Confession, 
at Augsburg, in Thy truth : Tliy word is truth " [Matthesius] ; 
or, as Vitus Dietrich, his secretary, tells us : "I know that 
Thou art our dear God and Eather ; therefore I am certain 

^ According to some authorities, he composed the liymn soon after the Diet of 
Spcier (1529). Comp. Kotii, GesclucMe der Kirchcnlieder , iv. p. 245. 


that Thou wilt destroy the persecutors of Thy Church ; 
shouldst Thou not do it, Thou wouldst be in like peril with 
ourselves : the cause is Thine, the enemies of the cross of 
Christ press upon us ; therefore it concerns Thy name and 
Thy glory to defend the confessors at Augsburg." Here, as 
in the Wartburg, Luther laboured at his translation of the 
Bible. In his hours of melancholy he accepted the consola- 
tions of John Krug, pastor at Coburg, confessed to him, and 
from him received absolution, and partook of the sacrament 
of the Lord's Supper at his hands. His poetical vein was 
also active here, showing itself sometimes in profound reflec- 
tions, and at other times in witty comparisons. Thus, from 
his window he contemplated the stars in the heavens and 
" God's whole beautiful vault, that rests upon no pillars and 
yet abides firm ; " or he viewed the course of the clouds, 
whose burden he likened to an ocean, " and yet saw no 
bottom for them to rest upon, and no vessels to contain them ; 
yet they did not fall upon us, but greeted us with a sour 
countenance and fled away. When they had passed, there 
shone forth that which had restrained them, even the rain- 
bow,"^ Amid his other pursuits, he was occupied with the 
Fables of ^sop, and, inspired by these, merrily fabulized on 
his own account. Thus he makes the jackdaws, crows, and 
magpies, which he could watch from his window, hold a Diet, 
a parody on that of Augsburg.^ He wrote sentences from 
the Bible on the door and walls of his room, for his private 
edification. Now and then he received visitors — as, for 
instance, Bucer and Urbanus Ehegius. He was continually 
informed as to all that was going on at Augsburg, and ex- 
pressed his opinion concerning the proceedings, as is shown 
by his correspondence. A superfluity of visitors he en- 
deavoured to avoid .^ It was also in Coburg that he received 

1 Letter to Chancellor Briick, De Wette, iv. No. 1277. 

^ He also dated his letters, ex comUiis monedulariim. Comp. Letters No. 
1201, to Justus Jonas, and No. 1205, to his Table Comjminons, De Wette, 
vol. iv. 

3 See his letter of 2d June to Melanchthon, De Wette, iv. No. 1219. 


the tidings of his father's death, and sought and found 
consolation therefor in prayer (coinp. chap. xvi.). 

The Elector John was the first to appear at Augsburg, 
arriving there on the 2d of May. On the 12th, the Land- 
grave Philip made his appearance, accompanied by 120 
horsemen and his chaplain Erhard Schnepf. The rest of the 
princes arrived by degrees, and composed, when they were 
all assembled, the flower of the German nobility. The 
emperor had been desirous of a private interview with the 
Elector of Saxony at Insbruck. He communicated his wish 
to John by the Counts of Nassau and Nuenar ; the elector, 
however, declined the invitation. From Insbruck, the 
emperor issued a rescript forbidding the Evangelicals to preach 
during the session of the Diet. But the elector represented 
to the emperor that the Evangelical party could not do with- 
out the word of God ; this alone was preached, he declared, 
and prayer also was offered for the emperor. He likewise 
reminded Charles of the fact that gospel preaching had been 
allowed to go on unprohibited during both the Diets of Speier. 
In the long interval through wliich the Estates waited for the 
emperor's coming, all sorts of questions of conscience arose 
among the Protestants as to the course to be pursued in 
particular cases — as, for instance, in regard to fasting. It 
was also queried whether, if the emperor, as was expected, 
should arrive on the eve of the festival of Corpus Christi, 
the Protestants should take part in the procession on that 
occasion. This it was decided not to do. 

An event unfavourable for the Protestant party was the 
death of the imperial chancellor, ]\Iercurius Guttinara. This 
personage had always exerted himself in behalf of the Pro- 
testants, and had possessed the ear of the emperor. Although 
ill at the time, he had started with the imperial retinue for 
Auf^sburg, in the hope of being able to speak a good word 
for the Evangelicals, but death overtook him at Insbruck on 
the 4th of June. 








/~\N the 15th of June 1530, Charles v. made his entry 
^^ with much magnificence into Augsburg. Tlie princes 
of the empire went in procession to meet him, and alighted 
from their horses to give him greeting. The Elector of 
Mentz paid homage to the emperor in a carefully-prepared 
oration, speaking in the name of all the members of the 
Holy Eoman Empire who were then assembled in Augsburg. 
After the delivery of this oration, the imperial train moved on 
in the following order. At the head marched two companies 
of Landshncchte, followed by the mounted tooops of the six 
Electors of Saxony, the Palatinate, Brandenburg, Cologne, 
Mentz, and Triers, each body bearing its own particular 
colour and equipments, and all having on light armour and 
scarlet jackets; these composed a company of about 450 
horse. Next came the retinue of the emperor : first, the 
pages in yellow and scarlet velvet ; then, mounted on superb 
steeds, came the Spanish, Bohemian, and German nobles, all 
arrayed in velvet and silk, with gold chains ornamenting 
their persons, nearly all of them being destitute of armour. 
These were followed by the trumpeters, drummers, and heralds. 
After the latter came the dukes, electors, and princes, and 
immediately following them rode the emperor himself, attired 



from liead to foot in the Spanish fashion, and mounted on a 
white Polish hackney. He rode beneath a tricoloured canopy, 
supported by six councillors of Augsburg. Outside of 
the canopy rode Kmg Ferdinand and the Papal legate, 
Lorenzo Campeggio, side by side, followed by tlie German 
cardinals and bishops, the foreign ambassadors and prelates, 
one of the latter, the Bishop of Osma, being the confessor of 
the emperor. The train of princes and nobles was followed 
by other companies of horsemen, those of the emperor in 
yellow uniforms, those of King Ferdinand in scarlet, and 
vying with these, the mounted troops of the spiritual and 
secular princes, each again in its peculiar colour, and either 
in armour and carrying pikes or equipped as sharp-shooters. 
The rear was brought up by the Augsburg companies of 
mercenaries and burghers who had that morning proceeded 
on horseback to receive the emperor. In front of the church 
of St. Leonard, Charles was greeted by the clergy with the 
hymn, Advenisti desiderahilis. The princes then escorted him 
to the cathedral, where the Te Dcum was sung, and a bene- 
diction was pronounced on the imperial head. His princely 
escort left him only after accompanying him to his apartments 
in the Palatinate [the palace of the Bishop of Augsburg].^ 

Immediately after this solemn entry, the emperor sum- 
moned the Evangelical princes, the Elector of Saxony, Margrave 
Qeorge of Brandenburg, Duke Francis of Luneburg, and the 
Landgrave Philip, to a private interview, and through the 
medium of Ids brother [who acted as interpreter] desired them 
to relinquish the preaching of sermons. The elder princes 
were silent from perplexity ; but the landgrave assumed the 

1 This description is taken from Ranke (vol. iii. pp. 234 sqq.), ^vho derives 
his account from contemporaneous sources. IIausser (Zeitalter der Ecforma- 
tion, p. 135) remarks in reference to this magnificent entry, that tlie emperor 
was in general no friend to such disiday ; Init, he adds, " on this occasion it was 
his desire to dazzle men's eyes : friend and foe should be made to feel that he 
was the emperor, in the old sense of the woid, the master of the world, the 
guardian of the Church." On the Diet of Augsburg, comp. Foestemann 
{Urkundenhuch, ii., Halle, 1833-35), Rotermund (Hanover, 1829), Facius 
(Leipsic, 1830), Fikenscheb (1830), and others [D'Aubigne, iv.]. 


office of spokesman, and replied (as the elector had, in 
writing, formeriy stated) that nothing was preached but the 
pure word of God. In a further written memorial, the princes 
referred to the Diet of Nuremberg (1523), in which the 
preaching of the gospel was expressly sanctioned. They 
could no more do without preaching, they declared, than they 
could dispense with daily food for the body ; since man, as it 
is written, does not live by bread alone, but by every word 
that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. They gave the 
emperor to understand that the interdiction of preaching 
would give rise to the suspicion that he was about to condemn 
the cause of the gospel unheard. In order to avoid the 
semblance of partiality, the emperor finally yielded so far as 
to prohibit preaching on hoth sides, reserving to himself the 
right to appoint preachers, and declaring that none save 
persons so appointed should da more than read the gospels 
and epistles. This mandate was publicly proclaimed to the 
sound of the trumpet. The Elector of Saxony expressed 
himself on the subject, in a letter to Luther, in the following 
manner : " Our Lord God must hold His peace at the Diet." 
Luther, however, approved of obedience to the emperor in 
this matter, and recommended a decent resignation to what 
was unalterable. In regard to participation in the procession 
on Corpus Christi day, the thing which the Protestants feared 
came to pass. The proposal was made that they should join 
in the procession, but was stedfastly declined by them. It 
was on this occasion — if not previous to this, during the 
audience concerning preaching (in which Eanke places the 
scene) — that Margrave George of Brandenburg fell on his 
knees before the emperor, and, bending his head to his im- 
perial majesty, assured him that he would rather have it 
stricken off than do aught against the faith ; whereupon the 
emperor bade him rise, saying, in his Netherlandish dialect, 
"Dear prince, I will not take your head off" \_Ldvxr Forst, 
net Kop ab\ 

A further question of conscience arose at the opening oi 


the Diet, on the 20th of June, Ijy a solemn mass in the 
cathedral. The Protestants thought that they need not 
scruple to be present on this occasion, as their assistance 
would be merely passive. They referred to the example of 
Naaman the Syrian, who was permitted by the prophet Elisha 
to attend upon the King of Syria in the temple of Eimmon 
(2 Kings v.). Consequently, the Elector of Saxony and 
Joachim von Pappenheim alternately held the emperor's 
sword during the ceremony. From the cathedral the pro- 
cession repaired to the council hall. Here Frederick the 
Count Palatine, as imperial minister, opened the Diet with an 
address, in which he presented the two propositions which 
were to engage the attention of the assembly, viz.: (1) Re- 
dress against the Turks ; and (2) The settlement of the 
religious disputes. It was decided to dispose of the latter 
subject first. The Protestants were accordingly directed to 
have their Confession of Faith in readiness to lay before the 
Diet on the following Friday, the 24th of June. With the 
preparation of this Melanchthon had been entrusted. He had 
subjected the articles of faith, as presented at Schwabach, to a 
thorough revision. Camerarius, his biographer, states tliat he 
frequently saw him labouring at this work amid tears and 
prayers. When the document was completed, he submitted it 
to Luther for inspection. Luther approved of it in all respects, 
and remarked, in reference to the tone of mildness which 
pervaded it, that it was not in his power to tread so gently 
and softly.^ After all possible pains had thus been expended 
upon the preparation of the Confession, it was signed not only 
by theologians, but also by princes and citizens, — by the 
Elector John of Saxony, Margrave George of Brandenburg, 
Duke Ernest of Liineburg, Landgrave Philip of Hesse, I'rince 

' Under date of L5th Mny he writes to the elector as follows : " I have read over 
Master Philip's Apolo<jy" (the title originally borne by the Confession); "it 
[ileases me right well. I should not know how to improve or alter it in any 
respect ; nor would it be well for me to attempt it, for I cannot tread so gently 
and softly. May Christ our Lord cause it to be productive of abundant and 
precious fruit, as we hope and pray. Ameu " (De Wkttk, iv. No. 1213). 


Wolfgang of Anhalt, and the imperial cities of Nuremberg 
and Eeutlingen. The example of these cities was followed, 
during the session of the Diet, by Kempten, Heilbronn, 
Windsheim, and "VVeissenburg, and subsequently by several 
other towns. The chivalrous sentiment with which these 
signatures were subscribed is apparent from the remarks that 
accompanied them. When Wolfgang took the pen, prepara- 
tory to signing, he said : " I have ridden on many a tilt for 
the pleasure of others, why should I not, at need, saddle my 
horse at the behest of my Lord and Eedeemer Jesus Christ, 
and for His glory, and, at the risk of earthly life, hasten 
toward an eternal crown of glory in the heavenly life ? " 
The Elector of Saxony gave expression to similar sentiments. 
When his theologians declared their readiness to go before 
the emperor alone if their master felt any hesitation about 
continuing to support them, the elector made answer : " God 
forbid that you should shut me out ; I also would confess 
Christ." He declared, furthermore, that his electoral hat and 
ermine were less valuable in his eyes than the cross of Jesus, 
seeing that he must needs leave the former behind him when 
he should depart from this world, whilst the other would 
accompany him to the stars. From that time John was 
called the Stedfast, the Confessor. The Confession was read 
in the episcopal palace of Augsburg, in the chapel of the 
emperor, on the Saturday following Saint John the Baptist's 
day (25th June), 1530. Chancellor Briick held the Latin 
copy of the document, while Chancellor Baier read the German 
copy aloud. The reading consumed two hours, and commanded 
the most rapt attention. The chancellor's voice was so distinct, 
and such silence prevailed in the chapel, that the multitude of 
people assembled in the courtyard of the palace could under- 
stand every word. Many of the listeners were astonished at 
the excellence of the things which they heard, having received 
very different accounts concerning the belief, or rather the 
unbelief, of the Protestants. 

1 See RoTERMUND, I.e. 1), 75, after Saubert, Be Miracidls A. C. i. ]}. 378. 


Let US examine the Confession a little in detail. This 
document contained, in the first place, a preface addressed to 
the emperor, in which it was stated tliat the present Con- 
fession was designed to be the basis of a pacific negotiation. 
Should this be impracticable, the Protestants, it was further 
declared, would appeal once more to a free Christian council, 
^v'hich the emperor, in common with the pope, had already- 
promised to convoke. The Confession proper is divided into 
two parts ; the first of these contains the principal articles of 
faith {articuli fidei prceciinii) as held by the confessors. These 
articles are twenty-one in number. In the second part, con- 
sisting of seven articles, are presented the abuses which the 
Evangelicals had taken upon themselves to reform {articuli, in 
quihus recensentur ahusus mutati). Part first has therefore 
more of an apologetical character, while part second is polemical 
(aggressive) in its bearing. Article first presents the doctrine 
of the Triune God as previously established by the Church in 
opposition to heretics, a doctrine in regard to which there was 
no controversy between the Ptomanists and the Evangelicals. 
This article is condemnatory not only of the ancient Arians, 
but also of the more recent Samosatian heretics, who taught the 
existence of but one Person in the Godhead, and regarded the 
" Word " and the " Spirit " as mere rhetorical figures. (In the 
supporters of this heresy we behold the forerunners of the 
Unitarians and Anti-Trinitarians of the present day, whose 
doctrines had already sprung up at this time.) In article 
second the doctrine of original sin, as taught by St. Augustine 
and his followers, is defended against the Pelagians. In this 
article it is taught that, in consequence of the fall of Adam, 
man is utterly corrupt, and given over to eternal death, until 
regenerated by baptism and the Holy Spirit.^ The third 
article, " concerning the Son of God," is, like the first, in full 
accordance with the definitions of the old Oecumenical synods, 

^ This doctrine has even found expression in Lutheran hymns ; witness the 
hymn of Lazarus Spengler, beginning, Durch Adams Fall ist gdnz verderbt 
menschlkh Xatur und Wesen. 


and in no point attacks the teachings of the Eomish Church ; 
here, also, perfect harmony existed between the two parties, 
who held in common detestation all who tampered with the 
doctrine in question. More occasion for controversy is 
afforded by the fourth article, concerning justification. This, 
though expressed in terms of great moderation, positively 
rejects the idea that any merit attaches to good works. The 
charge of false spirituality which, in consequence of this 
article, might be fastened upon the Protestants, is warded off 
in the fifth article, which afifirms the necessity for a settled 
church service, and repudiates the fanaticism of the Ana- 
baptists, who claim the Spirit and reject the word of God. 
The sixth article, as a guard against the misapprehensive 
idea that the Evangelical system, in consequence of its doctrine 
concerning faith, rejects good works, treats " of the new 
obedience," and represents good works as the fruit of faith. 
In the seventh article the Church is defined as an assembly 
of saints (congrcgatio sanctorum), in which the gospel is truly 
taught and the sacraments are duly administered ; that an 
identity of rites should obtain throughout this body cannot, 
it is claimed, with propriety be demanded. This latter idea 
is further elaborated in the eighth article. No exception 
could be taken to the ninth article, concerning baptism. 
Special reference is had, in this article, to the baptism of 
infants, and the doctrine of the Anabaptists is expressly con- 
demned. The tenth article, concerning the sacrament of the 
Lord's Supper, was so formulated as to exclude, in terms of 
positive disapprobation, the view upheld by Zwingle, and 
every other kindred conception of the ordinance. (We shall 
return to this later.) In the eleventh article the practice of 
private confession is sanctioned, but the scrupulous enumera- 
tion of every individual sin (as demanded by the Eomish 
institution of oral confession) is declared to be unnecessary, 
since (Ps. xix. 12) no one knows how frequently he trans- 
gresses. In contradistinction to the Scholastic theory of 
repentance, or penance, that exercise is reduced to the two 


factors, true contrition and faith, from which latter ffood 
works proceed as fruits of repentance. The idea that abso- 
lute perfection is attainable in this life is rejected, as 
well as the Novatian strictures which refuse to the fallen 
re-admittance to the communion of the Church. Concerning 
tlie use of the sacraments, the thirteenth article declares 
that the sacraments are not mere signs of confession on the 
part of man, but signs and testimonials {testimonia) of God's 
gracious will towards us. The doctrine of an external 
(mechanical) efficacy of the sacraments {ex oycrc (ypcrato) is 
rejected. In harmony with the fifth article, article 
fourteenth affirms that none but a person who is regularly 
called [rite, vocatus) has a right to teach in the Church and 
to administer the sacraments. According to article fifteenth, 
only such ecclesiastical usages should be maintained as may 
be complied with sinlessly and without burden to the 
conscience. This rule has reference to festival days and 
the like. The sixteenth article is devoted to political affairs. 
The Protestants had, especially since the Peasant War, been 
repeatedly stigmatized as the instigators of revolution. The 
more necessary was it, on this account, that they should 
emphatically express their respect for the civil authority, and 
represent obedience to that as a Christian duty, in antithesis 
to the Anabaptists, who entertained different ideas on this 
subject. The second coming of Christ for judgment and for 
the raising of the dead is taught in the seventeenth article, 
in accordance with the teachings of the ancient Apostolic 
Church ; the doctrine, as revived by the Anabaptists, of the 
restoration of all things, and the millennial kingdom (Chiliasm), 
is condemned. The eighteenth article treats, somewhat in 
detail, of free-will. As Melanchthon (in his Loci Communes) 
had previously demonstrated, man is indubitably the possessor 
of free-will to an extent that qualifies him for the fulfilment 
of civil righteousness [J7istitia civilis], and the performance 
of such things as fall within the sphere of nature and reason. 
But he has no power, without the help of the Holy Spirit, to 


do that whicli is righteous in the sight of God. Augustine is 
thus declared to be correct in opposition to Pelagius. The 
nineteenth article denies that God is the originator of sin. 
Good works, previously represented as fruits of faith (articles 
nine and ten), are further discussed in the twentieth article, 
in which passages from the Scriptures and the Church fathers 
are cited. In view of the abuses long prevalent in the Church, 
and the entanglement of men's consciences consequent upon 
those abuses, it is declared in this article to be of the utmost 
importance that justification by faith should be emphatically 
preached. Article twenty-first recommends a pious remem- 
brance of the saints. They may serve as exemplars for us, 
this article affirms, but we should not invoke their assistance. 
" The above," it is remarked at the close of the first part, " is 
about [fere) the sum of our doctrine ; and from this it may be 
seen that we teach nothing that is not in harmony with the 
Holy Scriptures or the (ancient) Catholic Church." 

Part second more particularly discusses the abuses which 
had crept into the Church, and the abolition of such abuses. 
In this part seven additional articles treat of participation in 
the Lord's Supper in both kinds, of the marriage of priests, of 
the mass and the sacrifice of the mass, of confession, of a 
distinction of meats, of monastic vows, and of ecclesiastical 
authority. Piemarkable, amongst other things, is the liberal 
conception of the Christian Sunday, as set forth in this Con- 
fession. Sunday is not regarded as a renewal of the Old 
Testament Sabbath, but as a voluntary, though beneficial, 
human institution, in the interests of good order. -^ 

If we endeavour to bring before our eyes the general con- 
dition of the times in which this Confession of Augsburg was 
drawn up, and look backward upon the conflict which had now 
lasted for thirteen years, — if we think of all the extraneous 
and effervescent materials which had infused themselves into 

1 [The laxness in the observance of Sunday, which prevails to so great an 
extent among the Germans, may be in part the result of this too liberal article. 
— Tr.] 


the work of the Eeformation, of the wide diifferences which 
in process of time had sprung up among the adherents of the 
new doctrine themselves, — the calm and moderate language of 
the Confession cannot fail to produce a beneficial impression 
upon us. In regarding this instrument, we seem to be standing 
on the borders of a limpid lake, the wild tumult of whose late 
storm-tossed waters has subsided, and in which the sun, once 
more issuing from the clouds, is mirrored, though the agitated 
waves are not yet entirely at rest. 

After the reading of the Confession, the German and Latin 
copies were both handed to the emperor. The German tran- 
script was delivered to the Elector of Mentz, for preservation 
in the imperial archives, while the Latin copy was sent to 

The reading of this Confession apparently made a good 
impression upon a few of the Catholic Estates. This M'as the 
case with the Bishop of Augsburg, Christopher Stadion, who 
showed himself favourably inclined to the Protestants, and 
who was recjarded as a secret Lutlieran. Even Duke "William 
of Bavaria, a decided opponent of the Protestants, declared to 
Eck that until that time he had been falsely instructed in 
regard to them. Eck asserted that he would be able to confute 
them with the writings of the fathers, but not with the Holy 
Scriptures ; to which the Duke replied, " I see, sir, the 
Lutherans are in the Scriptures, and we are near them." 
Among the spiritual princes, Stadion was not the only one 
on whom the Confession produced a favourable impression. 
Hermann of Cologne also expressed his assent to the doctrines 

' The original manuscrijjts seem to be lost. A number of copies were made, 
however, and translations were sent to all the courts of Europe. The oldest 
printed edition is that which was prepared at Witteniberg, while the Diet of 
Augsburp; was still in session. It bears the following title: G onfe ado fide > 
exhihita Imnctissimo Imperafori Carolo C'cesari Ainjuxlo in comitiis Augustoi ; in 
German: AnzaUjung und Bekannlnua des Gkmbens und der Leere, so die adpellie 
renden Sfdnde K. Maj. aiif jetzujen Tag zu Augsburg uberantwortet hahen. 
Several editions have been issued in modern times, for a notice of which see 
works on Literature. [See Aitleton's Ntw Am. Cyc. (1858), art. "Augsburg 


contained therein. The Archbishop of Salzburg felt con- 
strained to confess that he desired an alteration in the mass, 
the prohibition of meats, and similar ordinances ; he was 
indignant, however, that it Avas a monk who was endeavouring 
to reform all such things. On the other hand, the great 
majority of the Catholic Estates remained unmoved. Some 
pressed for an immediate execution of the Edict of Worms, 
maintaining that it should, if necessary, be carried out by 
force. Others proposed to submit the Confession to impartial 
judges, whose decision should be referred to the emperor. 
Others still (and their proposal obtained the majority of votes) 
desired that a confutation of the Confession should be imme- 
diately prepared. The duty of preparing this confutation was 
devolved upon a committee of Catholic theologians, nineteen 
in number, the most prominent of whom were Eck, Cochlaus, 
John Faber, and Conrad Wimpina. By the 12th of July 
these men had completed their task. The document which 
they drew up was exceedingly prolix, and, moreover, violent 
in expression. It was necessary to revise it ; but even in its 
revised form it was by no means a masterpiece. Frederic 
Myconius says of it, that it was fit neither for boiling nor 
baking; and Melanchthon wrote to Luther, that of all the 
wretched productions of their antagonists, the Confutation was 
the most miserable. The revised instrument (the Confutation, 
like the Confession, was drawn up both in German and Latin) 
was read in the Diet by the imperial secretary, Alexander 
Schweiss, on the 3d of August. It was not submitted to the 
Protestants for examination and confutation ; they were simply 
required to acknowledge their error and return to the Eomish 
Church. This they stedfastly refused to do. The emperor 
thereupon manifested displeasure, and denied to John of 
Saxony his formal investiture with the electoral dignity. The 
Landgrave of Hesse, bitterly offended at the proceedings of 
the Catholic party, secretly withdrew from the Diet on the 
6 th of August. No one, however, was more grieved than 
Melanchthon at the unsatisfactory result of his exertions. 


Luther tried to comfort him. " If it be a lie," he wrote to 
Melanchthon in German, in the midst of a Latin epistle of 
the 30th of June — "if it be a lie that God gave His Son 
for us, may the devil be a man in my place. But if that be 
true, what business have we with our sorry fears and tremors, 
our anxiety and mourning ! " " In domestic afHictions," con- 
tinued he, resuming his Latin, " I am the weaker, and thou 
art the stronger ; but in public affairs the converse is true." ^ 
Luther also endeavoured in his letter to console the elector, 
and to strengthen him in the faith. 

On the 13th of August, the Evangelical princes presented 
to the emperor a communication, in which they expressed their 
positive determination not to swerve from the word of God. 
They, however, manifested a willingness to enter into further 
negotiations. They proposed that each party should make 
choice of some few of its members, " well acquainted with the 
matters under discussion, and inclined to peace and unity, 
and depute them to treat with each other on the controverted 
articles in charity and amity." The Electors of Mentz and 
Brandenburg, and the Duke of Brunswick, acceded to this 
proposal. Each party selected a committee of theologians — 
Eck, Wimpina, and Cochkeus being on the one side, and 
Melanchthon, Brenz, and Schnepf on the other. Bishop Stadion, 
who earnestly warned the Eomanists to do nothing against the 
word of God, succeeded in bringing about another religious 
conference, which lasted from the 16 th to the 21st of August. 
Article after article was examined, and mutual concessions 
were made, but to no purpose, save that they were the occasion 
of no small annoyance to Melanchthon, whose health began to 
suffer in consequence. He was already forced to listen to severe 
reproaches, on account of his excessive pliancy. Luther nobly 
defended him against unjust censure, while, at the same time, 
he privately admonished his friend to yield nothing further. 

^ In privatis luctis infirmior ego, tu mdcm fortior ; contra in puhlicis tu talis, 
qualis ego in privatis, et ego in publicis talis, quails tu in privatis (De Wettk, 
iv. Ko. 1240; see also Nos. 1234, 1236, 1237). 


As, in spite of every effort, no understanding could be 
arrived at, the emperor, through the medium of Frederick 
the Count Palatine, informed the Evangelicals of his displea- 
sure at their persistence as a minority in " introducing a 
strange doctrine, adverse to the faith of the whole world, 
although the lesser number should follow the lead of the 
greater." The Protestants, however, were as firm on this 
occasion as they had previously been at the Diet of Speier, in 
refusing to acknowledge the right of the majority to rule in 
matters of faith. 

Melanchthon, in the meantime, had been preparing a 
written defence of his Confession against the Confutation of 
the Romanists, although the latter document was not in his 
possession,^ and he was obliged to recall it from memory. 
On the 2 2d of September, he delivered this Aijologij for the 
Confession to the emperor, who, however, would not accept it. 
It consists of fourteen articles, and, as a commentary on the 
briefer Confession, forms the second volume in the collection 
of Lutheran confessional works. 

Those of the Evangelicals who refrained from committing 
themselves to the Augsburg Confession on account of its 
doctrine concerning the Lord's Supper, were not willing to 
abstain from all confession of their faith. Hence the four 
cities of Strassburg, Costnitz, Memmingen, and Lindau sub- 
mitted to the Diet their particular Confession, called the 
Tctrajpolitana (Confession of the Four Cities), in the com- 
position of which the Strassburg theologians Bucer and 
Hedio bore the principal part." This Confession consisted of 
twenty-two articles, which, though differing as to letter from 
those of the Augsburg Confession, yet accord in purport and 
spirit with the latter instrument. Even the definition of the 

' He did not obtain it until later. At the time la which v/e refer, he was 
re-touching the Apology, while Jonas was translating it into German. 

^ Conffissio oder Bekantnus der vier frey und Reichstdtt, Strassburg, Codantz, 
Memmingen, und Lindav, in der sie Kais. Maj. avff dem Reichstag zu 
Aiigspurg im XXX. Jar gehalten, jres Glauhens und fiirhabens, der Religion 
halben rechenscJia/t getJian haben. 


Lord's Supper, as contained in the Tetrapolitan Confession, is 
so worded that sharp eyes are requisite to detect the distinc- 
tion between the doctrine therein set forth and the teaching 
of the Confession of Augsburg on the same point. While 
the tenth article of the latter asserts that the body and 
blood of Christ are veritably present (yere adsint) in the bread 
and wine, and are administered {distribmintur) to the com- 
municant, in the eighteenth article of the Tetrapolitana it is 
declared that Christ does, in His sacrament, still give to His 
disciples " His true body and His true blood, truly to eat 
and to drink, for the nourishment of their souls and for their 
everlasting life, so that they abide in Him and He abides in 
tliem." The only difference is that the relation of Christ's 
body to the hrcad as bread is kept in the background. There 
is an unmistakeable advance manifest in this Confession in the 
direction of positive statement, as compared with the system 
of bare negation which was at first so prominent a feature 
in the doctrinal writings of the Evangelicals. A further 
characteristic of what has since been distinctively called the 
Befonned Church, may be remarked in the fact that the 
Tetrapolitana accords the foremost position to an article on 
the authority of the Holy Scriptures, and rejects in an article 
of considerable length (article twenty-second), the worship 
of images, on which point the Confession of Augsburg is 

Zwingle also, who did not in person attend the Diet, availed 
himself of this opportunity to transmit to the emperor a written 
confession of his faith.^ This he submitted not simply from 
a desire to set forth his own individual confession, as he 
informed the emperor, but with a view to subjecting it, as 
well as everything else that he had written, to the judgment 
of the true Church — i.e., the Church that is founded on the 
word of God. 

In common with the Augsburg Confession, Zwingle pro- 

'^ Fidel Ratio ad Carolum V. {0pp. iv. ; Christoffel, ii. pp. 237 sq(i.)- 
See MuiiiKOFEii, ii. pp. 297 sqq. 

zwingle's communication to chaeles v. 127 

fesses his belief in the Triune God (in accordance with the 
Nicene Creed), and his adherence to the ancient ecclesiastical 
definitions in regard to the person of Christ ; the relation of 
the two natures he defines as in his writings on the Lord's 
Supper. He also sets forth Christ as the only mediator 
between God and man. He asserts that in Christ God has 
from the beginning chosen those who are appointed to salva- 
tion. In respect of original sin, Zwingle expresses himself in 
much milder terms than those employed in the Augsburg 
Confession. He apprehends this — original sin — as an in- 
firmity, a malady, of human nature, and distinguishes it from 
actual intentional transgression, or the personal criminality of 
an individual. As prisoners of war must pay the penalty 
which would properly devolve upon him in whose service 
they are, so the posterity of Adam must suffer for the trans- 
gression committed by him. In Christ, however, that which 
was lost is restored ; and in this restoration, children are 
included. Nor is it for us, Zwingle continues, presumptuously 
to pass judgment upon the children even of the heathen ; it 
would be rash to assert that such are damned. The Church, 
in the true sense of the word, Zwingle aiSrms, is the con- 
gregation of the elect. To be distinguished from this, is the 
Church to which all belong who have in any way come in 
contact with Christ (Christian peoples, Christendom). It is 
the Church in the former sense of the word alone that is 
infallible. As the children of Christians belong to the Church 
just as truly as the children of the Israelites belonged to the 
covenant people of the Old Testament, the former should be 
baptized (as the latter were circumcised) even when they 
cannot yet exercise faith ; they are baptized in view of the 
confession of the Church and in reliance upon God's promises. 
The sacraments are external institutions. Not only do they 
not effect the forgiveness of sins, they are not even mediatory 
thereto. The Spirit of God has no need of any conductor or 
bearer, for He Himself conducts and supports all things. 
Grace goes before the sacrament. The latter is but a testi- 


niony of grace ; thus the quails and locusts accompanied the 
wind, but were not themselves the occasion thereof, and thus 
the tongues at Pentecost were a testimony to the heaven- 
descended Spirit, but were not themselves the bearers of the 
Spirit. So, in like manner, grace is not initially communi- 
cated to a child through baptism, but baptism is a testimony 
to the Church that the child is a participant in grace. 
That the true hody of Christ is present in the Lord's Supper, 
Zwingle himself now confesses (an advance as compared with 
the former teachings of Zwingle on this point ! ) ; he, however, 
honestly and openly guards against any misunderstanding of 
his meaning, by adding that this presence is vouchsafed only 
to the contemplation of faith {fidei contemplationc), whilst he 
directly and persistently rejects the doctrine of the presence 
of the natural body of Christ, and the corporeal eating thereof 
(with the mouth and teeth), as a papistic error, adhered to 
only by those who are looking back longingly to the flesh-pots 
of Egypt (a cut at Luther !). 

Zwingle's amplification of the doctrine of the Lord's Supper 
— which doctrine, as presented by him, scarcely received due 
attention from the emperor — is for the most part a repetition 
of what had already been said by the Swiss Eeformer else- 
where (in the eucharistic controversy) ; we therefore have 
no intention of pursuing the subject farther at present. 

Ceremonies were regarded by Zwingle as in themselves 
indifferent. They are to be endured, he declares, in the 
spirit of charity, until the morning star shall arise in the 
hearts of those who cleave to them, provided that they are 
not contrary to the word of God. This, however, cannot be 
affirmed of pictures and images ; therefore they should not be 
tolerated. In making this assertion, Zwingle deprecates the 
charge of being an enemy to art. Painting and sculpture are, 
he admits, precious gifts of God, if not perverted to the 
service of idolatry. As the preaching of the divine word is 
a matter of the first importance in tlie worship of God, 
Zwingle petitions for capable preachers. The race of clergy 

ZWINGLE's communication to CHARLES V. 129 

equipped from head to foot according to rule/ he regards as 
useless devourers of the fruit of the land, and claims that the 
relation which they bear to the body of Christ is similar to 
that which humps and tumours sustain toward the natural 
body. Civil authority, even though it be of a tyrannous 
nature, should be obeyed. The doctrine of purgatory is 
rejected as a fiction, derogatory to the merits of Christ. That 
there is a hell, Zwingle not only believes — he knows it.^ In 
the portrayal of hell, his Humanistic reminiscences lead him 
back to the mythology of the ancients, and he speaks of Ixion 
and Tantalus. The eternal duration of the torments of hell, 
he (in harmony with the Augsburg Confession) maintains, in 
opposition to the doctrine of the Anabaptists. 

" The above," Zwingle continues, " I firmly believe, teach, 
and defend, and that not of my own imagination, but from the 
word of God ; and I pledge myself furthermore to continue so 
to do as long as my spirit remains in this body." He beseeches 
the emperor, together with the princes and nobles, not to pass 
over his communication as something unworthy of their atten- 
tion, seeing that right counsels have ofttimes emanated from 
the simple, and Truth herself has chosen the lowly and 
insignificant to be her heralds. In regard to his culture 
and learning, moreover, Zwingle confesses that these are 
possibly of greater consequence than his enemies would 
willingly tolerate, or than they can afford to despise ; he 
remarks, however, that he does not rely so much upon them 
as his foes conjecture. But above all, he points to the 
fruits of the Spirit, manifest in those churches which had 
been reformed in accordance with the word of God, and in 
view of those fruits he extols the graciousness and goodness 
of God. 

Zwingle's communication was printed on the 3d of July, 
and reached Augsburg on the 8th ; it, however, had not the 
honour of being laid before the Diet. Eck assailed it with 

' Genus mitratum atque pedatiim. [See D'Aubigne, vol. iv. p. 179.] 
2 Non tantum credo sed scio. 



the utmost vehemence. In three days he prepared a pamphlet/ 
in which, with a pathos that is almost ludicrous, he repre- 
sents Zwingle as a man who had been labouring for ten 
years to destroy all faith and all religion from among the 
Swiss, and to stir up the people against their rulers. The 
ravages which he had effected were worse, Eck declared, than 
those of the Turks, the Tartars, or the Huns. The body of 
Christ had been pronounced by him to be " common baker's 
bread ; " he had trampled under foot the service of tlie 
sanctuary, and had outraged the images ; the cloisters erected 
by the emperor's illustrious ancestors, the Hapsburgs, had been 
through his influence desecrated into temples of Venus and 
Bacchus. He had also drawn into the vortex of his impiety 
the people of Bern, of Eaurach, of Schaffhausen, and of 
Miihlliausen ; he had seduced the cities of St. Gall and 
Strassburg, and had invaded Hungary and Bohemia with his 
heresies. But, Eck remarked in conclusion, the greatest 
enormity that he had yet perpetrated, was his daring to 
address the emperor with such a work as his Confession. 

Zwingle repelled the aspersions of Eck in no gentle terms. 
He compared the conduct of his opponent to that of a wild 
boar that has broken through a hedge, and in his fury 
tramples down all that he finds. Next follows an extensive 
dissertation on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, from whicli 
theme Zwingle seemed unable to detach his thoughts. In 
conclusion, he indignantly repels the charge of sacrilege 
asserted to have been committed upon the institutions founded 
by the Hapsburgs. 

On the 2 2d of September, the recess of the Diet was read 
to the Evangelicals.^ According to this decree, the Protestants 
were permitted as a special favour to take until the 15 th of 
the ensuing April to consider whether they would come to an 

1 Repulsio Articulorum ZwlrKjlii. To this Zwingle replied by his publication 
entitled, Ad illustrissimos German'm j)rlncipes AuguntcE conrjrefjaton, de con- 
vitUs Echil (0pp. iv. pp. 19 sqq.) 

^ [See D'AuBiGNE, vol. iv. pp. 21 d Mpj. — Tn.] 


agreement with the Eomish Church in respect to the points 
at issue. During the period specified, they were commanded 
to conduct themselves quietly, and neither to print nor sell 
within their territories anything relating to matters of faith ; 
they were ordered to make no proselytes, and to leave the 
adherents of the old faith within Protestant domains undis- 
turhed in the exercise of their religion ; finally, they were 
required to unite with the emperor in the persecution of 
Sacramentarians and Anabaptists. The Protestants declined 
accepting this recess ; they oppugned the assertion that they 
had been vanquished by scriptural arguments. On the 23d 
of September the Elector John quitted Augsburg, althougli 
the Diet continued its session. The Turkish war was then 
nnder discussion. The Estates that accepted the recess bound 
themselves to aid one another in every possible way in all 
matters pertaining to the ancient faith, and disobedience to 
the articles of this alliance was declared to be punishable with 

The recess was not published until the 19th of November. 

It was a day of rejoicing to Luther when he was permitted 
to leave his solitude and return to the congenial society of his 
wife and children ; nor did he conceal his delight that the 
elector was at last " set loose from hell." As for the rest, he 
committed the cause of the Evangelicals to God.^ 

1 See Luther's letters of 24t]i and 28tli September, one of which (No. 1310) 
is addressed to his wife, while the other (No. 1311) is to Lazarus Spengler, Dk 
"VVette, iv. p. 174. 



THE close of the Diet of Augsburg has brought us to a 
new period in the history of the Reformation, or at 
least that portion of it which has reference to Germany. A 
convenient stopping-place is thus afforded us, from which, 
while we interrupt for a time the course of our narrative, 
we may strive to become better acquainted with the intrinsic 
essence of that Eeformation for the establishment of which 
the Evangelicals were labouring, with the doctrines maintained 
by the Eeformers, and with various other matters connected 
with the movement. The presentation of the Confession of 
Augsburg and the Tetrapolitan and Zwinglian Confessions, 
events so closely interwoven with the history of the Diet 
itself, offers, moreover, a most fitting occasion for a survey such 
as we have indicated. 

We shall, in the first place, inquire into the imjyort of such 
Confessions. On this subject there has been, and still is, a 
diversity of opinion. If we ask one class of observers, they 
will tell us tliat in these Confessions the jewel of evan- 
gelical faith has been deposited for all ages ; that in each of 
them an ever- valid rule is given, to which all must conform 
who would discharge the office of teacher in that particular 
ecclesiastical community whose doctrines they profess, or who 
are desirous merely of truly belonging to the same. Accord- 
ing to this, every person who claims either clerical or lay 
membership in the Evangelical Churches, is pledged to the 
very letter of these Confessions. A second class of thinkers, 


on the other hand, promptly reject such a demand as the 
foregoing, claiming that it is in direct opposition to the spirit 
and tenor of the Reformation ; they utter words of warning 
against a new papacy of paper, which, under certain circum- 
stances, might become still more contemptible than the 
actual pontificate in flesh and blood. The class to which we 
refer, behold in the confessional writings mere historical 
documents, from which the searcher of history may derive 
information concerning the religious tenets of our fathers as 
set forth in their own words, but wliich are of as little 
practical moment to the present generation as is the costume 
of those bygone days in which the Confessions originated, — 
a garb that none would now think of imitating save in jest. 

Let us examine these two views a little more particularly. 
As to the first, it is in the form of its presentation at 
variance with history itself. Ecclesiastical history, it is true, 
does afford instances of Confessions which have issued from 
synods, or similar authorities, for the purpose of affixing a 
limit to the arbitrary exhibition of doctrines within the 
pale of the Church, or for the erection of a barrier against 
heresies. Confessions such as we describe, we have already 
met with in the history of the ancient Church, and at some 
future period we shall see that like prescription of faith and 
doctrine were also introduced into the Evangelical Church, or 
that their introduction was at least attempted. As to the 
extent to which such rules of doctrine are justifiable, we do 
not at present propose to inquire. We will but ask whether 
the Confessions tendered at the Diet of Augsburg vjere such 
rules of doctrine. Manifestly they were not. They were not 
addressed to their own ecclesiastical party with a view to the 
regulation of what had before been unregulated, or to the 
suppression of some erroneous tendency ; but they were 
directed to a body external to the party, by which they were 
formulated to the Romish Church, or, rather, to the German 
Empire, that had called the upholders of the Evangelical 
faith to account. Nine years before, Luther as a simple 


luonk, appealing only to his own conscience and the word of 
God, had confronted the emperor and the empire at Worms. 
At the Diet of Angsburg, a similar stand was taken %cithuut 
Luther by the host of his confessors, or rather the confessors 
of the gospel, who had in the interim grown to be a power in 
tlie empire. The confessional writings were nought else than 
Apologies, vindications of faith ; ^ they were living testimonies 
to that which, amid fiery conflicts, had in the consciences of 
the confessors approved itself to be truth. These writings, 
furthermore, were not intended to contain a complete system 
of doctrine ; for when the imperial party insidiously demanded 
of the Protestants whether they had in their Confession said 
all that they had to say, the Protestants replied that various 
other things might have been said, but they had confined 
themselves to those statements that had appeared to them the 
most necessary. This answer, considered aright, leaves room 
for a further development of doctrine. The Confessions were 
not the theological elaborations of learned men ; though 
framed by accomplished theologians, they were the expression 
of the common faith of preacher and layman, of prince and 
people. The signatures to these instruments were not 
appended with a view to what should be in the future ; the 
idea was not. We promise to teach sucli and such things. It 
was with the present that the subscribers were concerned ; 
such and such things, they declared, we do believe and teach. 
No inipiiry into the facilities which these rudiments of a 
system of faith might offer for the formation of a Protestant 
scheme of theology — no query as to the mode in which the 
convictions of men's hearts, as expressed in these Confessions, 
might, after the lapse of centuries, be formulated, to meet the 
intelligent contemplation of scientific minds — suggested itself 
to the framers of the documents in question. The object of 
prime importance in the eyes of the confessors was to gain a 

' Tlie Confession of Augsburg was at first entitled an Apology ; the Tetra- 
politan Confession also claimed to "give an account of the creed and intentions of 
its formers," and Zwingle styles his own communication to the emperor a ratio. 


legitimate foot-hold on the soil of the present, and there to 
make good their stand. They thought not, at that early day, 
of marking out the boundaries of the prospective internal 
development of doctrine. 

That the confessors should express themselves in their own 
language, in the language of their time, was natural. Strange 
as it would appear, were we now to array ourselves in garments 
modelled after the fashion of that period, it would be equally 
absurd for us to expect to find the doctrines of our fathers 
clothed in the language of our modern schools of theology 
and the expressions of modern culture. 

None the less, however, are the Confessions to which we 
have reference not mere superannuated relics of the past, 
interesting only from a historical and antiquarian point of view, 
and to be numbered with the thousand and one documents 
that none save an indefatigable inquirer into the records of 
bygone days need be at the pains of investigating. On the 
contrary, these Confessions, as every examiner of them must 
be convinced, are of so forcible and penetrating a nature, that 
without a knowledge of them we should be unable to under- 
stand the history of the Eeformation, or to appreciate the 
battles that were waged for its sake. On this account, there- 
fore, we have devoted more attention to these documents than 
we have accorded to other papers possessing in reality a 
mere transient and historical value. Not only the theologian, 
but every cultivated member of the Church, should be 
sensible of a lively interest in these documents of the faith, 
in which pulsates the innermost life of the growing Evangelical 
Church. But besides this, it will in all time be incumbent 
on the ministers of the Evangelical Church (nor is such 
obligation an unworthy check upon Christian liberty) not 
only to make the purport of these confessional definitions 
of doctrine the subject of studious reflection, but also conscien- 
tiously to determine whether that purport, notwithstanding 
our modern changes of expression as to detail, continues 
to be accepted as a whole — whether, in short, modern 


doctrine, in respect of its inner substance, still accords with 
that confessed by the fathers and founders of our Evangelical 
Church. Such an agreement with the leading principles of the 
Eeformation, with the tenets which distinguished the Eeformers 
proper from the adherents of the Romish Church on the one 
hand, and the various sects on the other, may assuredly be 
demanded of every person who is desirous of assuming the 
functions of a minister in that Church which is the offspring 
of the Reformation. What those leading principles are, and 
what are the tenets that involve the distinction of which we 
have spoken, we will now proceed to inquire. 

In the first place, it must be remembered that the 
Reformers had no idea of foundinir a new relitrion. It was 
not Christianity, but the fetters of Papacy, by which they felt 
themselves straitened. They were not men of progress in 
the sense of desiring to overstep the foundation laid by the 
prophets and apostles — nay, by Christ the Son of God. In 
those facts of salvation whereon the Church has rested from 
the beginning, they avowed their belief, in language as 
positive as it was straightforward. They stood upon the 
same historical platform of revelation as the Catholics. 
Accordingly, they retained unchanged the ecclesiastical 
definitions relating to the Trinity of the Divine Being and 
the person and work of Christ, and expressed their dis- 
approbation of every attempt to alter those conceptions. The 
subject of dispute was not the bare fact of salvation in 
Christ, not the mysteries of the incarnation and redemption, 
but the personal appropriation and mediation of salvation. 
Not the goal itself, but the way to attain thereto, was the 
occasion of controve^s)^ How is salvation to be obtained ? 
Where are the pure and untroubled sources of the knowledge 
thereof to be found ? How can we most surely attain unto 
Christ, and, through Him, to God ? how be assured of eternal 
salvation in life and in death ? Such were the questions that 
engaged the attention of the Reformers. The way to salvation 
they found blocked up by all manner of human ordinances, 


the removal of which, and consequent opening of the road to 
all anxious inquirers, they strove with singleness of mind to 
accomplish. They sought not to shake the Church, but to 
purify it and re-establish it upon its original basis. Various 
means to this end were adopted, as suggested by the direction 
in which the need for reform became apparent. Luther was 
induced to set out upon his career as a Eeformer in consequence 
of that profound anxiety on the subject of a personal assur- 
ance of salvation which had been experienced by himself, and 
w^ith which his ministry at the confessional rendered him 
familiar in the case of others. His first appearance as a 
champion of reform, occasioned as it was by the trade in 
indulgences, had to do with the personal appropriation of 
salvation by repentance and faith. That man is justified 
before God not by works, but by faith, was the fundamental 
dogma from which he started. This dogma, grasped by 
Luther not as the fruit of painstaking speculation, but as the 
trophy of a hard-fought battle, he constituted his standard for 
determining the relative authority of the biblical Scriptures,^ 
which latter he regarded as containing the normal expression 
of the divine word. With Zwingle the case was different. 
He, as well as Luther, held the Pauline doctrine of justifica- 
tion, but that doctrine did not occupy so prominent a place 
in his mind. Like the Saxon Eeformer, he was thoroughly in 
earnest in the endeavour to secure his own salvation, and in 
the determination of his personal relation to the living God. 
A multitude of passages in his writings attest the heartiness 
of this effort on his part. But in the case of Zwingle, a 
personal craving for salvation was connected, from the outset, 
with all that concerned the welfare of the people whose 
pastor he was called to be. His programme of reformation 
was from the outset more extensive than that of Luther. The 
abolition of public abuses in the life of the people as well 

^ [It has been said that Luther doubted the authenticity of the Epistle of 
James and the book of Kevelation, because the doctrine of justification by faith 
seemed to him to be absent therefrom. — Tr. ] 


as of the Church, the unprejudiced testing of every institution 
or tradition, however sanctioned by custom, by its conformity 
or lack of conformity to the rule laid down in the Holy 
Scriptures, in the law, and in the gospel, was from the outset 
the earnest design of Zwingle. And yet, different as were 
the ways of the two men of whom we are speaking, there 
existed, in more than one respect, a perfect harmony between 
them. To be received with allowance is, therefore, the state- 
ment that Luther laid particular stress upon the material 
principle of the Eeformation, while Zwingle gave greater 
prominence to its formal principle ; or, in other words, that 
Luther's point of departure was the doctrine of justification, 
and Zwingle's thcsole authority of Scripture. For Zwingle 
incorporated the doctrine of justification by faith in his system, 
together with those other Christian truths which he found 
revealed in the Scriptures ; and Luther professed his accept- 
ance of the Scriptures as the one rule of faith and action. To 
the word of God as contained in the Scriptures, Luther, indeed, 
subjected all things, even the conclusions of reason, and by 
that word he regarded himself as bound in the face of all 
human authority or philosophy. In contrasting the conduct 
of the two Reformers, therefore, the utmost that we are 
warranted in affirming is that either one or the other 
principle was predominant in the case of each individual ; 
for, far from the two principles being mutually contradictory, 
they did but constitute the different poles of one fundamental 
principle, which was the proclamation of the one pure gospel as 
man's sole and sufficient authority in reference both to the 
ivaTj which he has to tread, and to the liyht which is to guide 
him on that way. The advantage to be gained is therefore 
but slight if we term Luther's Eeformation a predominantly 
subjective one, and style that which was inaugurated and 
carried on by Zwingle an objective Eeformation; meaning 
tliat the starting-point of the former was that personal, indi- 
vidual craving for salvation which made itself felt in the 
inward man, while the point of departure for the Zwinglian 


Eeformation was to be found in the open and manifest 
disorders of the Church, and of ecclesiastical and congrega- 
tional life. 

Others, again, have asserted that the difference between 
the two paths of reform consists in the (alleged) fact, that the 
chief force of Luther's opposition was directed against the 
Judaizing spirit of legality; while Zwingle, on the other hand, 
chiefly assailed the heathenish spirit of lawlessness, and the 
tendency to substitute the worship of the creature — the deifica- 
tion of the creature and of nature — for the worship of God. 
It is true that Luther removed the yoke of the law from the 
consciences of men, as Paul had done before him. But did 
not Zwingle do the self-same thino- ? And did not Luther 

D O 

oppose heathenish disorderliness with the same energy as 
Zwingle ? Did not Zwingle, moreover, in common with the 
Humanists of his time, set forth the nobler qualities of 
heathenism more prominently than did Luther ? (We shall 
revert farther on to a consideration of this question.) It is 
undoubtedly true that in the sequel (to the result of which 
we are about speaking, Calvin contributed his influence) the 
legal spirit of the Old Testament impressed a peculiar stamp 
upon the Eeformed Church; and, on a comparison of the 
different Confessions, the thought will arise that the detesta- 
tion of images, expressed in the Confessions of Zwingle and 
the four cities, and on the other hand the free conception 
of the Sabbath set forth in the Augsburg Confession, may in 
a certain sense be said to illustrate the assertion which we 
have cited at the head of this paragraph. It is an unmistake- 
able fact that Zwingle gives greater prominence to the majesty 
of God in His exaltation far above every creature, to the 
unapproachablencss of the Eternal and Infinite One, — attributes 
so grandly portrayed in the Old Testament, — than does Luther, 
who indeed assumes a tone of almost too great familiarity in 
speaking of God and divine things. The writings of Zwingle 
exhibit more of the sublime aspect of religion ; those of Luther 
depict it in its appeal to the human heart. In perusing the 


former, "vve are carried back to tlie classical language of 
antiquity, -wliile the latter remind us of the romance and 
mysticism of the ]\Iiddle Ages. All these things, however, 
are but relative distinctions that never amount to actual 
antitheses. The traits of unity considerably outweigh the 
distinctions ; and those traits of unity were the only ones 
that were of import, so far as the Eomish Church was con- 
cerned. The antithesis between Luther and Zwinde found 
its single expression in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper ; 
for the doctrine of predestination, which afterwards constituted 
a point of distinction between the Lutheran and Reformed 
Churches, originally involved no such antitheses, but was 
held in common by all Eeformers, however different their 
standpoints might be. Even the eucharistic difference was 
not in its nature invincible, so far as any principle therein 
involved was concerned, although in point of fact it remained 
unconquered. In history the thread of development is never 
spun off so clearly that some knots are not found, whose 
unravelling is reserved for future centuries. Such was the 
case with the Eeformation. The eucharistic controversy 
opposed a check to its quiet progress ; nor will we deny 
that the still more deeply-based distinctions indicated above 
may have been influential in the result produced. As, how- 
ever, these differences do not appear to us to be of sufficient 
importance to require a division of the Reformation into two 
principally distinct movements, we may look away for a while 
from such distinctions, which will appear more conspicuously 
at a later period, and fasten our eyes upon the principles of 
Protestantism common to both branches of the Reformation. 

Let us begin with a consideration of the so-called formed 
2')rinci2')lcs — Le., let us ask. Upon what authority did the 
Reformers base their creed? where did they seek and find 
their fountains of religious knowledge ? 

It is a current saying that the principle of the Reformation 
was that oi free investigation in the face of all autliority. This, 
however, is not a fair presentment of the case — from the 


historic point of view, at all events. It is true tliat the 
Reformers did advocate and practise free investigation in 
opposition to authority ; but neither term is to be taken in 
an unlimited sense. In opposition to the authority of the 
Bomish Church, they insisted upon the free investigation of 
Scripture. As we have already said, they did not desire to 
found a new religion, or by speculation to arrive at the 
knowledge of a truth as yet unknown. Truth, they acknow- 
ledged, had long ago been found ; they beheld it revealed in 
the word of God. The word of God, again, they held to be 
contained in the Holy Scriptures. To the authority of this 
word they subjected themselves unconditionally — Luther as 
well as Zwingle, and Zwingle as well as Luther. For them 
the Scripture possessed a double import, as the source and 
rule of religious knowledge, aS' w^ell as the medium of edifica- 
tion. It was the fresh fountain from which they drew con- 
solation in every trial, and encouragement to persevere in the 
right. With the Bible in liand they opposed the traditions 
and ordinances of the Church, as well as the " human inven- 
tions " of Scholastic wisdom ; and so, in reference to their 
own and the people's edification, they regarded the preaching 
of the word as far excelling all ceremonies and rites, even 
the operation of the sacrament being considered by them 
(especially by Z^\dngle) as linked with the operation of 
the word. 

Concerning the relation of the divine word to Scripture, 
i.e. to that collection of writings of the Old and New Testa- 
ments transmitted to us from past ages, they entered upon no 
scientific investigation ; yet we have seen that Luther was 
accustomed to make a distinction between the different books 
of Holy Writ, and we know how far removed he was in 
general from a spirit of anxious literalism. That in some 
cases, as for instance in the eucharistic controversy, he adhered 
unduly to the letter of Scripture, must indeed be admitted. 
But the very men whose perception of the breathings of the 
Divine Spirit in the Scriptures was far deeper and stronger 


than tliat of many others, were the least calculated to draw 
np a scholastically-correct theory concerning this inspiration 
of Scripture ; and hence their inconsistencies in regard to this 
subject are far more endurable than the rigid and stiff consis- 
tency of the orthodox dogmatical theologian of later times. 
The men of the Eeformation were led by a wholesome feeling 
when they sought to explain Scripture by Scripture — when 
they endeavoured to throw light upon obscure passages by 
comparing them with other and clearer ones. Although 
modern learning may, in respect of historic criticism and 
more clearly-defined doctrinal distinctions, have outstripped 
the theology of the Eeformers (and after the lapse of three 
centuries it would be sad if such were not the case), the 
principle laid down by the Eeformers is none the less worthy 
of acceptance to-day than when it was first advanced. The 
Evangelical Church of the present time rests, as it did three 
hundred years ago, on the declarations, rightly apprehended, of 
the word of God. Its ministers are ministers of that word, 
whose duty it is to preach, as evangelical truth, not their own 
inventions, nor any system of human wisdom, but such things 
only as are based upon the word of which we speak, as are in 
accordance with the Holy Scriptures and agreeable to their 
spirit (not their letter). The Scriptures will for ever consti- 
tute not merely the foundation of evangelical theology, but 
also, in a manner peculiar to themselves, the household treasury 
of every evangelical family, the religious touchstone of every 
individual evangelical Christian. However modern culture may 
mould the scientific apprehension of Scripture, its religious, its 
saving import will ever continue the same. 

Like observations are true in regard to what has been 
called the material principle of the Eeformation, the evangelical 
doctrine of grace and justification by faith. It was the 
experience of Luther, if of any man, that man is utterly 
unable with all his exertions to attain unto peace with God 
through the works of the law. The language of the Apostle 
l*aul concerning the distinction between the law and the 


gospel, between the freedom of the natural man and the 
freedom of one who is born of God, was adopted by Luther 
from the deepest conviction of soul. And so, in a different 
mode and connection, Zwingle also speaks of the eternal mercy 
and grace of God — grace which, not by reason of any human 
merit, but by the free impulse of its essence, is led to com- 
passionate the weak and sinful creature. With this conviction 
the Eeformers opposed both the heaven-storming pride of those 
who would secure salvation by their own power and defiantly 
prefer a claim to merit in the sight of God, and the faint- 
heartedness of those who, under the pressure of the law and 
sin, despair of God's mercy. The doctrine of justification by 
faith has been objected to on the ground that it disparages 
human freedom, enervates moral effort, and gives a welcome 
support to slothfulness in well-doing. These objections are, 
however, based wholly upon misunderstandings. It is but a 
superficial view of the subject that can discover a destruction 
of freedom where its spiritual re-energizement should be seen. 
It was proposed to remove the frail supports of morality to 
which Christendom had trusted for centuries, and to give a 
firm substructure to the moral life by basing it upon religion. 
The free agency of man is apparently denied by Luther in 
contradistinction to Erasmus; but which of those two individuals 
was in reality the morally free man, independent of human 
fear and favour ? In ascribing all good things to the grace of 
God, and thus rejecting the idea of human merit, in what 
respect did the Eeformers differ from us when we, in other 
and intellectual domains (that of art, for instance), admire not 
the exertions of the artist, but the finished work, the product 
of a higher inspiration ? Not the thing made, but the thing 
that has come, into leinig, the development of which is always 
a mystery to us, — the thing which God Himself has created, 
which is born of the Spirit, for whose origin the artist 
cannot always satisfactorily account to himself, — this it Is 
which ravishes the soul when we gaze, admiring, upon a great 
work of art. And should it be otherwise in religious matters ? 


The more complete the renunciation of all pretension to merit 
on the part of the human actor, the more unsullied is the 
moral action, the purer our admiration thereof; admiration 
which, moreover, we owe not to the creature, but to Him who 
worketh to will and to do after His good pleasure. In such 
a renunciation as the above, humility consists — not the coun- 
terfeit presentment, but the real grace, peculiar as that is to 
Christianity. In this renunciation of all personal merit, in 
the surrender of oneself to the free grace of God, there is 
incontestably something grand, as contrasted either with that 
painful legal righteousness that causes the seeker after it to 
smart under the yoke of the law, or with that haughty self- 
exaltation that emboldens the harbourer of it to reckon up his 
exploits before God, in the vain expectation of thus balancing 
his account with his Maker. 

The grace of God is apprehended by man in the exercise of 
faith ; hence the great prominence invariably given by the 
Eeformers to faitli, which they declared to be all-important in 
the justification of man before God,^ is perfectly intelligible. 
But we should totally misunderstand the teaching of the 
Eeformers were we to regard the faith of which they speak as 
a bare credence of historic or doctrinal truth, or a mere 
theoretical assent of the intellect. The confessional writings 
themselves in several passages deprecate such a misunder- 
standing, as also the idea that good works were rejected by 
the framers. By faith the Eeformers understood a trusting 
surrender of the soul, or rather of the whole inner man, to the 
saving grace of God. Far from seeking faith outside the 
domain of morality, faith, as they contended, is itself the 
moral power whence the new life proceeds.^ Good works 
seemed to them to be not a mere appendix or addition to 
faith, but the direct fruits thereof ; they believed that they 
were not to be laboriously accumulated one after the other 

' It is true that upon this doctrine Luther laid greater stress than Zwingle. 
^ [It has been beautifully said by a (Jennan theologian of the present day, 
that " trust is the soul, and obedience the body of faith." — Tk.J 


from without, but that they were to be acquired from the 
tree of life as the product of a mind renewed by the Spirit 
of God. 

As in the case of the scriptural principle of the Eeformers, 
so in regard to the principle of faith, all depends upon a 
correct apprehension of it. As the former was so perverted 
as to cause the Bible to be regarded in the light of a code, 
which theologians were to apply in much the same manner 
as jurists apply the civil code, and in which the letter was to 
prevail over the spirit, instead of the converse ; so faith was 
soon converted into a dead work, a work of the head, of the 
lips, on which at last a claim to merit was based — a claim 
more perilous than any ever founded on good works. For, 
to perform the latter, some exertion at least was requisite ; 
but this false faith-righteousness was easily attained, and 
none were better pleased with it than intellectual sluggards 
and moral cowards. The history of the Church in the period 
immediately succeeding the Eeformation abounds in examples 
of such deviation from the true doctrine of the Eeformers, 
and even the age of the Eeformation itself was not free from 
the error. Luther must needs sigh over so gross a misunder- 
standing of his doctrine and so scandalous an abuse of it 
as a cloak for wickedness. The experience of the Apostle 
Paul was the same. The higher the value of faith and of that 
evangelical liberty thence resultant, the more imminent 
the danger of misunderstanding and abuse. But while we 
maintain our grasp upon the scriptural principle of the 
Eeformation, should such a consideration as the above prevent 
us from holding fast to the principle of faith advanced by the 
Eeformers, from retaining it as a fundamental principle of the 
Evangelical Church, as a jewel which we would not barter 
either for an anxious legalism or for that theory of the 
mutual independence of belief and action which snatches the 
living deed from the sanctuary of religious sentiment, and 
severs morality from faith ? The frigid, moral sermonizing of 
a later period, with its abstract conception of virtue, found 



scanty access to the hearts of meu, as compared with the 
mighty preaching of faith by the Reformers. We shall have 
at some future time an opportunity of seeing that the perverted 
handling of the truths of faitli, in the form of dogmatical 
tenets utterly devoid of any moral import, was on the other 
hand equally as pernicious as the opposite treatment of 
the doctrine of morality, without a deeper foundation of 

We have already called attention to the fact, that those 
two principles which have been styled the Formal and Material 
Principles of the Eeformation, are in reality but the two 
poles of one and the same principle of reform. This one 
principle, negatively expressed, consists in the removal of 
every obstacle that bars the way to salvation in Christ. In 
positive terms, it amounts to a re-enthronement of that free 
and living confession of Christ from which, in the course of 
the ages, men had lapsed away. For what purpose are we 
directed to the Scriptures, if not because they testify of 
Christ ? Wherefore is faith pressed upon us, but because the 
believer seeks and finds salvation in Christ ? Christ it is, 
according to the view of the Reformers, to whom, as the 
fulness of the promises, all Scripture tends ; Be is the sub- 
stance of faith ; He is at once the beginner and finisher of 
faith ; He is the only mediator between God and man. As 
before remarked, the controversy of the Reformers and the 
Romish Church did not respect the ijcrson and u-ork of Christ 
in themselves. In regard to this point there was at first no 
dispute. The Romish Church had preserved the doctrine 
concerning the Son of God and Son of man, in its 
objectivity, in the form transmitted by the primitive Church, 
viz. the one person consisting of two natures. But Rome's 
teaching concerning the believer's relation, to Christ was widely 
different from that of the primitive Church. Christ was no 
longer the only mediator between God and man. It indeed 
may be affirmed that He was altogether ousted from His 
mediatorial office. He was regarded shnply as the " Lord 


God," the future Judge, from whose wrath men sought refuge 
at the knees of the " mother of God." She was now the 
mediatrix, and the rest of the saints shared in the mediatorial 
office in heaven ; the faitliful implored their intercession. On 
earth, the hierarchy (with the pope at the head thereof) 
usurped the mediatorship between the laity and God (Christ). 
The Eeformation, in removing all these human mediatorial 
agencies, reopened for believers the way to Christ, and 
through Him to the Father. And this led to a reformation 
of the doctrine concerning the Church. 

A great theologian of modern times (Schleiermacher) has 
advanced, as one of the differences between Catholicism and 
Protestantism, the statement that the Roman Catholic arrives 
at faith in Christ by first believing in the Church ; while the 
Protestant, believing first in Christ, holds himself to be, 
through that belief and his consequent condition as a member 
of Christ's body, connected with the Church, the congregation 
of the Lord. The Eeformers had as little idea of establishing 
a new church as of founding a new religion. It cost Luther 
some hard struggles to separate himself from the old Eomish 
Church. The Protestants held that the Church is where 
Christ is, where His word is preached, and where the sacra- 
ments are administered according to His institution and 
agreeably to the spirit and intent of His command. From 
the external visible institution of the Church, which, when 
resting upon the foundation of the divine word, they did 
not depreciate, they distinguished that kernel of the Church 
which is withdrawn from the eye of man, — the fellowship of 
the faithful with Christ, the communion of saints, of the elect. 
Only God, the searcher of hearts, knows who really belongs 
to this fellowship. In regard to the constitution, arrange- 
ment, discipline, and practice of the visible Church, the 
Eeformers held that these all might differ according to circum- 
stances. They set a higher value upon unity in the s]3irit 
than upon unity of constitution and identity of rites.^ None 
^ See supixi, chap, xvii., on Luther's treatise on Ecclesiastical Order. 


the less peremptorily, however, did they insist upon the 
preservation of order in opposition to the disorderly courses of 
the fanatics. Protestant doctrine recognises no special priest- 
hood stamped as such with an indelible character. Spiritual 
priesthood is common to all Cliristians. The ministry of the 
word is, however, connected with the function of instruction 
established by the Church. The Protestant Church is not a 
priestly Church, but a popular Church. It will not merge 
itself in the State, but neither would it engulf the State. 
Though the relation of State and Church continued undefined 
in many particulars, the Protestant Church came to an 
immediate understanding with the State and the civil 
authority in regard to one point, by inserting in its Con- 
fessions an article " Concerning Eulers," in which article 
the latter were, in accordance with Scripture, recognised as 
ordained of God, any revolt against them being stigmatized 
as worthy of punishment. A new relation was assumed 
by the Church of the Eeformation in regard not only to the 
discipline of the State, but also in respect to the constitution 
of the family ; marriage, which forms the basis of this latter 
constitution, being declared admissible for ministers of the 
Church, and celibacy being no longer considered a special 
requisite of piety. 

Neither the Church militant on earth, with its priesthood, 
as we have shown above, nor, on the other hand, the Church 
triumphant in heaven, with its throng of saints, was permitted 
to interpose between souls that were hungering for salvation — 
believing souls — and the Ptcdeemer, whom faith discerns at 
the right hand of God. Media3val doctrine had, it is true, 
observed a distinction between adoration and invocation. The 
former was declared to pertain only to God ; the latter might 
properly be offered to saints. But even this invocation for 
intercession was rejected by Protestantism, although the 
commemoration of saints was sanctioned, and they were 
recommended as patterns for imitation. Thus, also, the 
sacrament of the altar, uplifted or carried about in procession 


for the adoration of the people, could constitute no object of 
worship for the Evangelical Church.^ 

Different as the views of the Eeformers at this time still 
were in regard to the import of the sacraments, and especially 
of the Lord's Supper, the leaders of the Eeformation, con- 
sistently with their doctrine concerning the word of God and 
faith, agreed in maintaining that a mere outward participation 
in the sacraments was in itself insufficient for salvation ; they 
opposed the doctrine of the opus opcratum, and insisted, in 
this connection as in others, upon the requisiteness of a living 
faith. In rejecting the sacrifice of the mass as a repetition 
of Christ's sacrifice, and in abolishing masses for departed 
souls, the Eeformers acted in harmony, — under the influence 
both of the scriptural principle, which is ignorant of such 
sacrificial transactions under the New Covenant, and of the 
material principle of reform, which beholds in the death of 
Jesus a perfect sacrifice, and regards the forgiveness of sins as 
dependent on faith in that one off'ering. 

The comparative silence of Protestant doctrine in respect 
to what are called the " Last Things " has been objected to as 
a deficiency. We, on the contrary, regard this reserve as a 
wise reticence. The Eeformers did not pretend to any new 
revelations in regard to the world to come. From the very 
fact that they made faith the all-important basis of their 
doctrine, they contented themselves with the intimations of 
Scripture concerning the Lord's return for judgment and the 
resurrection of the dead, and rejected both the doctrine of 
purgatory as held by the Eomish Church, and the chiliastic 
dreams of the Anabaptists. 

We have now, as we believe, delineated the main features 
of the faith of the Eeformers, and have also furnished some 

^ Luther, indeed, at first held very conservative opinions on this point, as well 
as in some other respects. See his letter of 11th December 1523, to Leonard 
Puchler, fencing-master at Halle (De Wette, ii. No. 560). He left it to the 
option of every person to worship or not ; should worship be offered, however, 
he said that it must be done in faith ; the mere outward adoration of the lips 
and the knee availed nothing, he maintained. 


suggestions as to the mode in wliicli the permanent import 
and value of that faith may be extracted from the historic 
documents relative thereto. We do not assert that our 
interpretation of the different matters referred to is in every 
case and in all respects the right and fitting one ; it has been 
our desire simply to endeavour to expose the inner motives 
which lay at the foundation of the great conflict whose history 
is now occupying us. It is not our intention to affirm that 
the motives indicated by us were the only ones prevalent in the 
Keformation, or even that all who professed the new method 
of religion were conscious of those motives. It may not 
be denied that among high and low, among princes and their 
subjects, all manner of motives were at work, concerning the 
purity of which some doubt may be entertained. Many were 
involuntarily swept away by the current of reform, and 
followed the example of others, without rendering to them- 
selves any account of their faith. For that very reason, 
however, there is more urgent need that history should 
bespeak a hearing for those who felt impelled to furnish 
such an account before God and men. Let that need be our 
excuse for devoting an entire chapter to the discussion of the 
topic in question. 












HAVING concluded our doctrinal digression, we will now 
return to the narration of facts. But before resuming 
the thread of our history of the German Reformation, it will 
be necessary for us to give an account of some incidents which 
occurred either in the course of the year 1530 or previous 
to that time. In chapter ix. we noticed the spread of the 
Eeformatory gospel in the Ehine provinces. The Evangelical 
doctrine had also gained a foothold in the territories of Berg. 
Towards the end of the fifteenth century, Adolph Clarenbach 
was born, of poor parents, in the parish of Luttrmgen and 
township of Lennep. He was educated at the Universities of 
Miinster and Cologne, and, after applying himself diligently 
as a student, himself became a teacher. As co-rector at 
Miinster, and subsequently at Wesel, he became associated 
with two Augustinian monks, John Clopris and Matthew 
Girdenich by name, who, under the influence of Luther's 


writings, were in the habit of holding religious meetings for 
tlie study of the divine word. They called themselves the 
Synagogue. Clarenbach now zealously devoted himself to 
the spread of the gospel in the territories of Berg. In pro- 
secuting this work he was utterly fearless of danger, and con- 
templated unmoved even the possibility of having to lay down 
his life for the truth. To such a conclusion of his labours 
he was actually called. His friend Clopris, pastor at Biiderich, 
being summoned to Cologne under accusation of heresy, 
Clarenbach voluntarily accompanied him, in April of the year 
1528. He was immediately arrested, by order of the council, 
and confined in the Frankenthurm. In the repeated examina- 
tions which he was forced to undergo, he stedfastly adhered 
to his faith. Towards the end of his imprisonment, which 
continued for eighteen months, a companion in captivity was 
accorded him in the person of Peter Flysted (Fleisteden), from 
the Jiilichian village of the same name. This man, it must 
be admitted, had in some degree merited his incarceration by 
indecorous behaviour in the cathedral of Cologne. He had 
kept his hat on during the mass, and had manifested his 
detestation of that act of worship in a coarse and insulting 
manner.^ A sojourn in the same cell with Clarenbach had, 
however, an enlightening effect upon his mind. The two 
together sought and received strength in prayer. Clarenbach 
was tried for heresy by Arnold von Tungern, whose acquaint- 
ance we have already made in the Eeuchlinian controversy. 
Neither Von Tungern nor the pastor of Lenuep, who visited 
Clarenbach, succeeded in prevailing upon the latter to recant. 
On the 24th of September 1529, Clarenbach and Flysted 
were led to the place of execution, followed by a vast con- 
course of people. •' Cologne ! Cologne ! " exclaimed Claren- 
bach, " how dost thou persecute the word of God ! " Among 
the monks who accompanied the condemned Evangelicals on 
their journey to the stake, was an Augustinian who whispered 
words of gospel cheer to Clarenbach, thereby refreshing him 

' He had spitten upon the ground at the elevation of the host. 


not a little. "When the fire was kindled, Adolph cried with a 
clear voice, " Lord, into Thy hands I commend my spirit ! "^ 

Previous to Clarenbach's martyrdom, Scotland had shed 
the blood of a man who may be regarded as the first Eeformer 
of that country. Patrick Hamilton, a scion of an illustrious 
race that claimed kinship with the royal family of Scotland, 
was born in the year 1503. At the University of St. Andrews, 
where he prosecuted his studies, he devoted himself to classical 
literature, and also became acquainted with the writings of 
Luther. A journey to Germany, made in the year 1526, 
introduced him to personal intercourse with the Picformers of 
Wittenberg. At Marburg he attached himself to Francis 
Lambert. Having, through association with these men, be- 
come fully impregnated with the principles of the Eeforrnation, 
he felt an ardent desire to communicate those principles to 
his own countrymen. He accordingly returned to Scotland 
and commenced the preaching of the new doctrine. But 
under the pretext of a disputation, to be held by himself and 
a Dominican monk named Campbell, he was decoyed to St. 
Andrews, and there arraigned before a spiritual tribunal. In 
his case, also, all attempts to induce him to withdraw from his 
faith proved fruitless. He was, however, himself successful 
in evangelizing the priest Alesse (Alesius), who was deputed 
to attend upon him. It being found impossible to obtain a re- 
cantation from him, he was delivered to the secular authorities 
as an obstinate heretic, and was by them condemned to the 
stake. At the age of twenty-five he was burned on the 
square before St. Salvator's College. While dying, he, like 
Clarenbach, commended his spirit to the Lord. His heroic 
death excited universal admiration, and the fact that Campbell, 
his accuser, died soon after in delirium, was by many regarded 
as a divine judgment. 

The first sacrifices to the faith in France occurred about 

' See GoBEL, Geschichte des Christlichen Lebens in der rheinisch-westphdlischen 
evanrjelischen Kirche, vol. i. p. 121 ; Wiesjiann, in Piper's Evawjelischer 
Kalender for 1851, pp. 163 sqq. 


this time. As we intend to revert to these on some future 
occasion, we will at present mention only the fate of Louis 
Berquin, a nobleman of Artois and friend of Erasmus, who 
suffered death by the hand of the executioner on the 10th 
of November 1529. In Bohemia,^ likewise, the fires of the 
stake were blazing for the destruction of heresy ; nor was the 
arm of persecution idle in Hungary.^ 

In the north of Europe, on the contrary, the progress of 
Eeform was attended with fewer hindrances. Three years 
before the Diet of Augsburg, the Ptcformation was triumph- 
antly introduced in Sweden, at the Diet of Westeras, in June 
1527. Eepresentatives of the burgher and peasant classes 
were present at this Diet, in addition to the clergy and 
nobility. King Gustavus Vasa, who had studied at Witten- 
berg and had become acquainted with the doctrine of Luther, 
laid his programme of Eeform before the Diet, supported by 
the theologian Olaf Petri, the same who had previously 
vanquished his antagonist, Peter Galle, in a public disputation.^ 
After some stormy scenes, the nobility and high clergy pro- 
fessed their readiness to cede the estates of the Church to the 
secular government. " We are content," the bishops declared 
in a special deed, "with whatever wealth or poverty the king 
decrees us." They also expressed a desire to be released from 
further attendance on the Diets. In the year 1529, the king 
convoked an assembly of the Swedish clergy at (Erebro, for 
the purpose of entrusting them with the spiritual concerns of 
the Eeformation. Here it was agreed without difficulty, that 
the pure word of God should be preached, and that the youth 
should be instructed in the same in the schools. It was 
decided, on the other hand, to make as few alterations as 
possible in ecclesiastical usages. In the course of the same 
year, Olaf Petri drew up a manual for the guidance of the 
clergy on such occasions as weddings, funerals, etc. 

' See the Persccutlonshuchlein of C. Czkhwenka, Giitersloli, 1869, pp. 74 sqq. 
- SeeSchicksak tier evangelischen Kirclie in Unrjarn, 1520-1608, Leipsic,1823. 
3 [See chap. ix. p. 220.— Tk.] 


The political foundation of the Eeformation M'as laid in 
Denmark also in the year 1527, at the Diet of Odense. 
True, the prelates there obtained a confirmation of their 
privileges in respect of tithes, revenues, and the like, but it 
was resolved that they should no longer be permitted to 
hinder the free preaching of the word of God. The king 
(Frederick l.) succeeded in effecting the adoption of a con- 
stitution which guaranteed to tlie professors of Lutheranisni 
the free exercise of their religion until the occurrence of a 
general council. Permission to marry was likewise accorded 
to the clergy. Until the time of which we speak, the Eeforma- 
tion had gained a more extensive foothold at Wiborg, on the 
peninsula of Jutland, than elsewhere in Denmark. Hans 
Tausen (Tausanus), a knight of the Order of St. John and 
a native of Funen, had, amid many struggles, preached the 
gospel and founded a school at Wiborg. There the Eeforma- 
tion was definitively established shortly after the Diet of 
Odense. The superfluous churches of the city were suppressed. 
The cathedral, however, with the bishop and his chapter, 
resisted the innovations. In the year 1529, the king called 
Hans Tausen to the Church of St. Nicholas at Copenhagen, 
and from that time the Eeformation made progress in the 
capital city of Denmark. In the year 1530 a Diet was held 
there, attended by evangelical preachers from all parts of the 
kingdom. A few days after the presentation of the Confession 
of Augsburg, the Danish preachers laid before the Diet of 
Copenhagen (on the 9 th or 1 1th of July) a Confession, the forty- 
two articles of which substantially coincide with the twenty- 
eight articles of the Augsburg Confession, though no previous 
agreement was entered into by tlie framers of the two symbols. 
The chief difference is, that the Danish Confession expressly 
insists upon the scriptural principle of the Eeformation, and 
combats the Papacy in severer terms. From that time forth 
the city was gained over to the new order of things, although 
it subsequently became the scene of some conflicts. 

And now let us return to our history of the German 


Reformation, Soon after the close of the Diet of Ano;sburg in 
the autumn of 1530, the Landgrave Philip of Hesse concluded 
an alliance for six years with the Helvetic cantons of Zurich 
and Basel and the imperial city of Strassburg, with which 
latter he had previously, in the preceding June, entered into 
treaty.^ In forming the alliance of which we speak, the land- 
grave acted independently of the other Evangelical princes, 
who still scrupled to connect themselves with men whose 
opinions in regard to the Eucharist differed from their own. 
In December of the year 1530 a Diet was held at Schmal- 
kalden, at which were present, in addition to the Landgrave 
Philip, the Elector John of Saxony, Prince Wolfgang of Anhalt, 
the councillors of Margrave George of Brandenburg, and two 
counts of Mansfeld, one of whom was in attendance in the 
capacity of plenipotentiary of Duke Philip of Brunswick. 
There were also present ambassadors from the cities of 
Strassburg, Nuremberg, Costnitz, Ulm, Magdeburg, Bremen, 
Eeutlingen, Heilbronn, Memmingen, Lindau, Kempten, Issny, 
Biberach, Windsheim, and Weissenburg, It will be observed 
that, while the above names are chiefly such as were subscribed 
to the Confession of Augsburg, the separate confessors of the 
four cities were also represented.^ 

At the Diet of Augsburg, the emperor had arrived at an 
agreement with the Catholic Estates, to the effect that his 
brother Ferdinand should be elected Ptoman king and future 
successor to the imperial dignity. Against this arrangement 
the Evangelicals protested. The Elector of Saxony despatched 
his son, John Frederick, to Cologne, where the election had 
been appointed to take place at the end of the year, to enter 
a protest against the affair. Notwithstanding this, however, 
Ferdinand was elected Eoman king on the 5th of January 
1531. Luther had recommended submission to this arrange- 
ment as to something that was inevitable. He attached the 
utmost importance to the retention of the electoral power by 

' For particulars see Morikofki;, vol. ii. pp. 256 sqq. 

" See also Ketm, Schwdhische Eeformationsrjeschkhte, p. 182. 


his sovereign John. That power would be hazarded if 
Ernestine Saxony resisted the imperial desires. The electorate 
would in that case be transferred to the Albertine line. Such 
an event, Luther thought, would be a greater misfortune than 
the recognition of Ferdinand. He dreaded a division of the 
empire, and lifted up a voice of warning in view of such a 
catastrophe.^ " These are distressing matters," he wrote to the 
elector under date of 12th December 1530, "God knows; 
but God grant that we make them not much worse by 
attempting to make them better." " The things that are to 
come lie not within the scope of man's knowledge and power, 
as all history teaches us." He shows that God had thus far 
arranged things better than men could possibly have anticipated; 
and he does not conceal his displeasure at Landgrave Philip's 
alliance with the Swiss, from which league, he declared, a great 
war might result. Then, however, he exclaims : " Ah, Lord 
God, I am too childish in such worldly affairs. I will pray — 
I do pray — that God will graciously protect and guide your 
electoral grace, as He hath done hitherto ; or, should some- 
thing transpire that I would not willingly behold, I pray that 
He may yet graciously continue with us, and bring us by ways 
of His own devising to a happy termination of our troubles. 

ISTo conclusion was reached during the first congress at 
Schmalkalden, several of the deputies having insufficient 
instructions. A second meeting was held in February 1531, 
when it was resolved to send a common protest to Cologne, 
and to petition the emperor to forbid the Attorney-General 
and the Imperial Chamber to enter into legal proceedings 
against the Protestants in matters pertaining to their religion. 
At the same time an effort was being quietly made by the 
Evangelicals to ascertain the strength of the forces that could 
be brought into the field by them in case of need ; in making 
this calculation, they reckoned upon some foreign help, parti- 
cularly that of Denmark. It was also decided that Melanchthon 
^ De Wette, iv. No. 1333. 


should make out a statement, which, translated into French, 
might be sent to the different European courts for the purpose 
of refuting the slanderous charges disseminated against the 
Protestant party, A third congress was held at Schmalkalden 
on the 29th of March, when a formal alliance was at lengtli 
concluded, the outlines of which had been projected at the 
electoral court of Saxony. In the preamble to the document 
drawn up on this occasion, the following statement was made : — 
There appears to be an intention that those who have permitted 
the pure word of God to be preached, and abuses to be abolished 
in their domains, shall be forcibly diverted from their Christian 
designs ; since, however, it is the duty of every Christian ruler 
not only to have the word of God proclaimed to his subjects, 
but also to use his utmost endeavours to prevent his subjects 
from being constrained to fall away from the divine word, they, 
the contracting parties, had, simply for such purposes of self- 
defence and safety as are admissible in the case of every 
individual, according both to divine and human laws, united 
in the following compact : " As soon as any one of them should 
be attacked for the gospel's sake, or on account of any matter 
resulting from adherence to the gospel, all of them would at 
once proceed to the rescue of the attacked party, and aid him 
to the utmost of their ability." It was, however, expressly 
declared that this Christian agreement was entered into 
without hostile intentions against the emperor, or any 
of the imperial Estates, or any person whomsoever, but 
purely for the preservation of Christian truth and peace in 
the German Empire, and for the resistance of violence and 

Thus was formed the Schmalkaldic League, its duration 
being at first limited to six years. The Landgrave of Hesse 
exerted himself most vigorously to secure the inclusion of the 
Swiss, with whom he had formed a private alliance, in this 
greater league ; but liis proposal was rejected by the Electorate 
of Saxony at a princes' Diet held at Frankfort in the same 
year. Fewer olijections were raised to the accession of the 


four cities, Bucer having succeeded in influencing Luther to 
consent to their admission,^ 

Luther could not, however, agree with the mediator Bucer 
in thinking the sacramental controversy a dispute about mere 
words ; he was ready, he declared, to die for his opinion, if 
such should be the will of God, but he hoped that by God's 
grace the Strassburgers would yet arrive at the true view of 
the sacrament.^ On the other hand, he would hear nothino; 
of a union with the Swiss, either with Zwingle or (Ecolam- 

The answers of foreign powers were favourable to the 
Schmalkaldic League. Francis i. of France, who was a per- 
secutor of Protestants in his own country, willingly promised 
his aid to an alliance that threatened to become dangerous to 
his rival the emperor. Henry viil. of England also admitted 
that there was great need for reform in the Church, but stated 
that caution should be exercised in dealing with people who 
underrated the intent of rulers. (He had not gotten over the 
vexation that Luther's rude attack upon himself occasioned 
him.) He also looked forward with hope to a general 

The emperor, meantime, was meditating the rupture of the 
Schmalkaldic League. In his endeavour to effect this, he had 
recourse to stratagem. The disagreement between Electoral 
Saxony and Hesse had not escaped his observation, and of it 
he accordingly availed himself for the furtherance of his de- 
signs. He despatched the Counts of Nassau and Neuenar to 
the elector, charging them to inform him that the cause of the 

^ See Luther's letter to Bucer of the 22(1 January, another to Zell's wife of 
24th January, and one to Duke Ernest of Liineburg of 1st February, De Wette, 
iv. Nos. 1347-1349. 

^ "In fine, we will pray and hope until a perfect agreement is reached, and 
not be premature in our rejoicings before we are really united. . . . Next to 
Christ, my Lord, there is nothing upon which my heart is so set as the thorough 
union of these people with us ; for the attainment of tliis object there is no death 
so bitter that I would not willingly endure it ; and if God should fulfil my de- 
sire, I would then cheerfully die, and take my leave of this world, should such 
be the will of God " (De Wette, I.e. p. 220). See also Kos. 1352, 1353. 


emperor's ungraciousness towards liini at the Diet of Augs- 
burg was the suspicion entertained by his Imperial Majesty 
that John adhered to the atrocious doctrine of the Swiss in 
regard to the Lord's Supper ; the emperor further invitcil 
Jolm to attend the impending Diet at Speier, and there to 
answer for himself. But the elector simply referred the 
imperial envoys, in behalf of their master, to the Confession of 
Augsburg, in which clear expression had been given to his views 
concerning the controverted point. Under the plea of illness, 
he also excused himself from attendance upon the Diet of Speier. 

In the summer of 1531, the members of the Schmalkaldic 
League assembled at Frankfort-on-the-Main. They there 
arrived at an understanding relative to the allotment of 
military expenses, if, as seemed probable, a war should speedily 
become necessary. The Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave 
of Hesse were solemnly appointed chiefs of the League. Thus, 
by the close of the year 1531, the alliance of the Evangelicals 
was thoroughly established and equipped. 

It was now decreed that the Imperial Diet should convene 
at Nuremberg instead of at Speier. Before the Schmalkaldic 
allies repaired to the former city, they thought it advisable 
first to hold an assembly of their own at Schweinfurt, in 
April 1532. The emperor again endeavoured to treat with 
the Protestants. He sent to them the Electors of Mentz and 
the Palatinate, through whom he had entered into negotiations 
with them in the preceding year. He commissioned his 
envoys to instruct the Evangelicals for the present to confine 
their innovations in religious matters within the limits set 
forth by the Augsburg Confession, and not to form alliances 
with the subjects of any other of the imperial Estates ; he also 
desired the allies to forbid their theologians to preach outside 
of Protestant territories, to leave the jurisdictions of the 
Catholic bishops unmolested, and above all to recognise the 
election of Ferdinand as Roman king. Upon the stedfast 
refusal of the allies to comply with these requisitions, the 
envoys proposed to continue the negotiations at Nuremberg. 


At the Diet of Nuremberg, which took place in the summer 
of 1532, the Protestants were designated as those "who had 
joined in the Confession of Augsburg," and thus were recog- 
nised as an actually existing party. Concerning the course 
to be pursued by the empire in regard to any who might in 
future adopt the Confession, there seemed, however, to be no 
certainty attainable. Luther, as before, advised the Protestants 
to meet the overtures of their opponents amicably.^ He warned 
the Evangelical party against too precise a stipulation of the 
articles of peace,^ and commended the result, as ever, to Ms 
" faithful and loving God." The Hessian theologians were less 
easily satisfied. 

An agreement was finally concluded on the 23d of July 
1532, and ratified on the 2d of August of the same year. 
This was the so-called Pteligious Peace of Nuremberg. Its 
terms included those only who had already professed their 
adoption of the Confession of Augsburg. The agreement might, 
indeed, more properly be styled a truce than a peace. It 
provided that until the occurrence of the promised council, 
which was to take place at the expiration of a year, or in case 
the council should not be held, until the next imperial recess, 
neither party should be guilty of any kind of violence towards 
the other on account of any difference in creed.^ The 
emperor for his part promised to put a stop to every religious 
process which had been set on foot by the Attorney-General. 
Charles was delighted to arrive at such a conclusion of the 
matter, on account of the urgent need for vigorous action in 
regard to the Turks. The rigidly Catholic Estates, however, 
were anything but content. The Elector Joachim of Branden- 
burg hotly declared that "he would not on any condition 

1 See De Wette, iv. Nos. 1462 and 1463. 

2 " If we insist upon defining every particular so positively according to our 
own judgment, and refuse to trust all things in the matter to God and let Him 
work His will therein, the affair will come to no good, and the saying of 
Solomon will be verified for us : ' The wringing of the nose bringeth forth 
blood ; ' and, ' Whoso despiseth small things shall not attain unto greater.'" 

3 Literally, neither party should injure, wage war against, arrest, invade, or 
besiege the other. 



consent to a peace with the Protestants ; he would rather 
forfeit his dominions and his subjects, and lose his own life." 
Aleander also, the Papal legate, who desired nothing less 
than a strict prosecution of the Edict of Worms, protested 
against the peace. On the side of the Protestants, the 
Landgrave Philip evinced dissatisfaction w^ith the treaty, and 
made bitter complaint against the Elector of Saxony. The 
latter, however, was at this time lying upon his deathbed, and 
could no longer attend to the affairs of the allies. He referred 
the landgrave and his complaints to John Frederick, the prince 
electoral. John the Stedfast departed this life on the 16 th 
of August 1532. 

Matters wore a gloomy aspect in Switzerland also at this 
time. The peace that was brought about in 1529 was of no 
long duration. Zwingle's melancholy gaze into the future, 
and the forebodings which he expressed to his friends, seemed 
to be justified.^ The Abljey of St. Gall gave the proximate 
occasion for the resumption of hostilities. This abbey had 
long been under the protection, so-called, of the four cantons 
of Zurich, Lucerne, Glarus, and Schwytz, the recent difference 
in whose religious opinions could not fail to exert a prejudicial 
influence upon their common superintendence of this ancient 
Catholic sanctuary.^ The old abbot, Francis Geissberger, had 
died before the outbreak of the first religious war. His death 
seemed to the two Eeformed protectoral cantons, Zurich and 
Glarus, to furnish a fitting occasion for the suppression of the 
abbey, and their policy would have been to delay the 
appointment of a successor to Geissberger until such appoint- 
ment should of itself appear superfluous. Instead, however, 
of pursuing such a course, they demanded point-blank that, 
unless the subsisting conventual arrangements could be proved 
to be in accordance with Scripture, the abbey should forthwith 
be suppressed and the buildings be devoted to secular purposes. 

- See HoTTiNGER, I.e. vii. pp. 348-355. 

^ The documents relating to this controversy may be found in the ah-eady 
cited archives of Eschek and Huttingek. 


The two Catholic cantons of Lucerne and Schwytz of course 
refused to accede to this proposal, and insisted upon the 
appointment of another abbot. Whilst the guardians of the 
abbey were thus at odds, its inmates, who had concealed the 
fact of their superior's death as long as possible, themselves 
proceeded to elect a new head ; their choice fell upon Kilian 
Kaufi, who, soon after his advancement to the abbacy, collected 
together the treasures of the cloister, and, in company with 
his monks, fled across the lake by night to Bregenz. Kaufi 
afterwards received his investiture from the emperor, and was 
confirmed in his new dignity by Pope Clement. Arbitrary as 
this whole proceeding was on the part of the conventuals, the 
Eeformed cantons were themselves by no means guiltless of an 
arbitrary encroachment on corporate rights ; for not only did 
they refuse to recognise the abbot, on the ground that he had 
obtained his office surreptitiously, but they even took it upon 
themselves to release the inmates of the cloister from various 
burdens, in the hope of thus inclining them to the Evangelical 
faith, and they also appropriated the decorations of the cloister 
church for the benefit of the poor. 

But it was not alone the differences relative to the Abbey 
of St. Gall that revived the flame of religious discord. The 
continuous increase of gospel confessors, the spread of the 
Eeformation even in districts where opposition to it had been 
more lasting, exasperated the antagonists of reform. Their 
irritation was further augmented by the foreign alliances 
contracted by the Evangelicals. Not only had Zurich and 
Basel, as we have seen, undertaken an alliance with the 
Landgrave Philip of Hesse, who manifested an increasing 
disregard of the scruples entertained by Luther concerning 
union with the Eeformed party, but negotiations were likewise 
pending with Prance and Venice.^ The stipulation of the 
treaty of peace relative to mutual toleration at length began 
to be transgressed in various places. 

^See Escher's Archiv, i. pp. 273 sqq. ; Murikofer, ii. pp. 261 sqq. The latter 
calls the league with Venice a "preposterous " affair. 


In vain did Bern, which had stedfastly declined all foreign 
alliances, endeavour to preserve the peace ; the last mediatory 
efforts of Glarus, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Appenzell were 
likewise abortive. War was declared by the interception of 
supplies on the part of the Evangelicals. On the 9th of 
October 1531 the five cantons took the field with eight 
thousand men. Upon the reception of this intelligence, an 
advance guard under the command of George Goldli moved 
from Zurich towards Cappel, and was subsequently followed 
by the main body of troops. The first engagement took 
place on the 11th of October. I refrain from a description 
of the encounter as foreign to the purpose of this history, and 
invite attention instead to Zwingle alone, who was to be 
discovered among the foremost of the combatants. He it was 
who up to the last moment had counselled war, and it was 
just that he should not withdraw himself from the conflict. 
He seemed to have a presentiment that his body would remain 
on the field, for as he went forth with frequent and fervent 
prayer, bearing the banner of the canton, " he conversed with 
his intimate associates in such terms as made it evident that 
he had no expectation of ever seeing his home again." The 
fact that when he was about to mount, his horse retreated 
several paces, was regarded by his anxious friends as an evil 
omen.^ When the enemy began their charge, and while 
Zwingle was standing in the foremost rank amid the bravest 
of his fellow-combatants, Leonard Burkhard said to him, 
" This is a bitter mess that is set before us. Master Ulrich ! 
Who will eat it ? " ^ " I," replied Zwingle, " and many an 
honest man beside, who stands here in the hand of God, 

^ Hottinger (vii. p. 372) instances a parallel case in the life of Mungo Park, 
whose horse stumbled at the commencement of the traveller's second journey to 
Africa, which occurrence Walter Scott held to be ominous. An equally striking 
circumstance may be cited from the life of Napoleon, whose horse stumbled and 
threw its rider before his passage over the Niemen. See Segur, Histoire de 
NapoUon et de la grande armie, vol. i. p. 142 : " A voice exclaimed, ' That is a 
bad omen. A Roman would go back.' " 

' " Master Ulrich, how are you pleased with this matter ? Are the radishes 
salt enough ? Who will eat them ? " (Nuscheler, p. £21). 


whose we are whether we live or die." He also spoke words 
of encouragement to Captain Lavater and others who were 
standing near. " My brave men," said he, " be of good cheer 
and fear not. Though we should suffer, our cause is still a 
good one. Commend yourselves to God, who is able to take 
care of us and of our dear ones. May He have them in His 
keeping ! " A fierce conflict now began. According to an 
ancient Swiss custom, stones were employed by the com- 
batants, in addition to the ordinary weapons of warfare. One 
of these missiles struck Zwingle as he stood in the neighbour- 
hood of a pear tree, and levelled him to the earth, just as he 
was administerinfj consolation to one who had oeen stricken 
down a few moments before. Zwingle, as he fell, supported 
himself on his knees for an instant, exclaiming, " The body 
they may kill, but not the soul," and then sank backwards 
and lay with folded hands and eyes upturned to heaven.-^ His 
lips moved in silent prayer. In this condition he was found 
by some adherents of the old faith, who asked him if he would 
like to confess and if he desired to see a priest ; they also 
admonished him to call upon the saints. Zwingle replied by 
shaking his head. " Die, then, obstinate heretic ! " indignantly 
exclaimed Captain Vockinger ^ of Unterwalden, and gave him, 
at the same time, his death-stroke. 

Though the accounts of Zwingle's departure may differ as to 
detail, it is certain that he died the death of a hero and was 
found among heroes ; six hundred men of Zurich alone were left 
upon the battle-field, among whom were representatives of the 
noble races of Escher and Meiss. It is said that even in 
death Zwingle's countenance preserved the hue of health and 
vigour, looking as he had been wont to look in the pulpit, 
when delivering one of his most animated discourses. Tears 
flowed from the eyes of his friends who recognised him. A 
malignant joy was depicted on the faces of some of his 
antagonists, but the behaviour of others indicated that they 

1 Others state that he fell face downwards. 
^ By some this name is written Fuchinger. 


were free from so base a sentiment. Hans Schonbrunner, 
formerly superior of the convent at Cappel, could not refrain 
from tears as he gazed on the form of Zwingle. " Whatever," said 
he, " may have been thy creed, I know that thou wast a loyal 
confederate. May God have mercy on thy soul." The most 
savage of the foes of the Evangelicals vehemently demanded 
that the corpse of Zwingle should be dismembered. Magis- 
trate Golder and Amman Thos of Zug replied to this proposal 
as follows : " Let the dead rest. We are not yet at the end of 
this matter. God will judge those that have fallen." Such 
voices of moderation failed, however, to obtain a hearing. A 
trial was held over Zwingle's dead body, which was con- 
demned as that of a heretic. It was then quartered by the 
executioner of Lucerne, the pieces were burned, aud the ashes 
mingled with those of swine. But the heart of the great 
Eeformer was saved. Thomas Plater is said to have snatched 
it from the flames and to have presented it to Zwingle's friend 
Myconius at Zurich as a sacred relic. It is related that the 
latter, who shortly afterwards removed to Basel, threw it 
into the Rhine, in order to avoid making it the object of a 
superstitious veneration ; such a proceeding would seem to be 
an evidence of great zeal rather than of tender friendship. 
But, happily, the authenticity of the story is not vouched 

That the adherents of the old faith regarded the defeat 
of Zwingle as a righteous judgment of God, is a circum- 
stance that cannot surprise us, nor can we blame them for 
entertaining such an opinion. But when we find Luther 
taking up the same strain of exultation, and again ranking 
Zwingle with Mlinzer, we cannot fail to be both surprised 
and grieved.^ 

A fate similar to Zwingle's overtook the valiant Commander 
Schraid, who was found dead on the field of battle, surrounded 
by thirteen of the members of his commandery ; his remains, 

^ See Myconius, De Vita et Ohltu ZwinrjUi, at the conclusion. 
2 See Luther's Letters, De Wettk, iv. Nos. 1429, 1430. 

EEVIEW OF zwingle's chakacter. 167 

however, received worthy burial at the hands of friends.^ 
And, alas for the many others who fell as sacrifices in this 
battle ! who can count them ? Jerome Botanus, the faithful 
and zealous assistant of fficolampadius, perished in a subse- 
quent engagement. And so fell many more. 

We do not describe in detail the fight at Gubel, which took 
place on the next day, when the auxiliaries of the Reformed 
had arrived. Such a recital would be the less edifying, as it 
would be impossible to disguise the fact that the events which 
transpired were of such a nature as to reflect little honour upon 
the Eeformed troops. The disorder manifest in the Evangelical 
army, its lack of military discipline and thirst for plunder, — an 
appetite which the Bernese satisfied by the sack of the cloister 
of Muri, — are characteristics Avhich do not impress us with the 
idea of a host that was battling for the treasures of religion, 
for the cause of God ; while the Catholics at least were fight- 
ing for their saints, for their altars, and their homes. It 
is thus, however, that it was to be. It was — in a melancholy 
way, it is true — to be impressed upon the mind of the 
Evangelical party, that the interests of truth are not to be 
advanced by material weapons ; that the cause of the Divine 
Son of man is not to be defended by the sword. In the fate 
of Zwingle, however, and his heroic death, a highly tragical 
element is discernible ; that fate and death set forth the fact 
that the very noblest and best of humanity may, by a fatality 
of circumstances, be drawn into undertakings which exceed 
the limits previously calculated upon, and for the results of 
which the mover in them can consequently not be held 
responsible. Admitting, if you will, that Zwingle was in 
error in thinking to force concessions by the might of the 
sword, where Luther based his hopes upon the foundation of 

1 " Oswald Sagesser, a conventual of Kiissnacht, and also a preacher of the 
word of God, had the body of Schmid conveyed from the battle-field of Kiiss- 
nacht, where it was interred in the charnel-house of the chapel of St. Nicholas " 
{Zilr. Neujahrshl. p. 14). Bullinger WTites concerning him: "This Conrad 
Schmid was a pious man and a great help to the cause of Reform, as may be 
seen in the chronicles," etc. 


the divine word aloue, we still contend that Zwingle's was a 
noble error, and one which, associated as it was with a sacred 
enthusiasm for the cause of right and truth, is far more 
pardonable and infinitely higher than that subtile Erasmian 
prudence that always scents danger afar off and skilfully 
evades it. It must be considered, moreover, that the position 
which Zwingle occupied was very different from that of 
Luther, the former being at once a Reformer and Ee- 

Zwingle was cut down in the summer of his days, in the 
midst of many and manifold activities. In considering his 
career, the thought forces itself upon us, How much more 
might this man have accomplished for the Church, for 
learning, for his city and his country, if his life had been 
prolonged ! How many traits in his own character might 
have been clarified, and moulded into a harmonious whole ! 
Nevertheless, he was, just as he was, a whole man ; and that 
which he was permitted to accomplish, succeeding generations 
have honoured, and will continue to honour, all the more 
gratefully because his time was so short. The great improve- 
ments which he effected in the schools of his native canton, 
and his promotion of good order and morality in his vicinity, 
have been set forth in detail by others.^ His literary labours 
have been already referred to by us at various times, in 
connection with different events in his life. A comprehensive 
exhibition of his merits as an expositor of Scripture and a 
religious teacher cannot be expected here. It will suffice for 
us to mention two of his writings, from one of which his 
doctrinal system may be gathered in greatest fulness ; the 
other was written shortly before his death, and has been 
termed by BuUinger his " Swan Song." Both were dedicated 
to Francis i., king of France. The first, the Commentary on 
True and False Religion'^ was written in the year 1525, and 

^ See especially Morikofeu, in various passages. 

'^ De vera et falsa rel'ujione commentarius {0pp. iii. pp. 145 sfp[.), trans- 
lated into German by Leo Juda. 


bears the motto, " Come unto me, all ye that labour and are 
heavy laden, and I will refresh you." With philosophical 
clearness and dignity, and yet with religious warmth and 
earnestness, Zwingle here discusses the essence of religion — 
a task of reflection which Luther would never have imposed 
upon himself. Eeligion is apprehended as the sum total of 
piety, as the bond that unites us to God. Eeligion, it is 
stated, essentially consists in attachment (adhccsio) to God 
as the one true good, and in the endeavour to do the will of 
the Most High. In this definition, however, Zwingle is far 
from contemplating only that which has since been called 
natural religion. True religion and true Christianity coin- 
cide in his estimation. All spiritual health, he maintains, 
comes from Christ. Zwingle calls no man a Christian [in the 
eminent sense of the term] save him who places his whole 
confidence in God alone and not in any creature, and hopes in 
God's mercy through Christ His Son ;^ who fashions himself 
after the example of Christ; who dies daily, denies himself daily, 
and whose whole endeavour is to suffer nothing in himself that 
can offend his God. Hence the Christian life is a conflict 
both difficult and dangerous, that cannot be intermitted without 
injury to the soul that has undertaken it, but for which a 
glorious victory is in prospect ; for he who battles here, shall 
be crowned hereafter, if he forsake not Christ, his Head. 

The second and shorter of the two writings to which 
reference is had, the Brief and Clear Exjjosition of Faith^ was 
composed at the suggestion of Maigret, the French ambassador, 
and introduced at the court of France through Collin's 
instrumentality. It w\as designed to refute the malicious 
slanders which, in France as elsewhere, were continually being 
disseminated against the confessors of the gospel. The most 
recent biography of Zwingle calls this the " purest and freest 
of his writings."^ Zwingle does not permit himself to be 

1 In the passage referred to, Zwingle calls Christ "God of God " {Deus de Deo). 
" Christiance Jidei brevis et clara expositio {0pp. iv. p. 42). 
3 MOEIKOFER, ii. p. 334. 


disturbed by the calumnies of the foes of the Evangelicals. 
Their falsehoods serve but as foils to heighten the brilliancy 
of the truth. At the head of his Confession appears the 
proposition that has been called the chief fundamental tenet 
of the Zwinglian theology, — viz., that the eternal, uncreated 
God is the only worthy object of our adoration and worship, 
the alone sufficient ground of our confidence. By this 
assertion he rejects the worship of the saints and the Virgin 
Mary, though he holds tlie latter in high honour and does not 
refuse her the appellation of " mother of God " {Dei para). In 
like manner the sacraments, as external things, are declared 
unworthy of veneration. Neither the invocation of the 
saints nor the use of the sacraments is instrumental in 
securintr the forsriveness of our sins, which can be obtained 
from God alone. In the surrender of the Son of God, 
Zwingle sees the strongest demonstration of the divine com- 
passion for sinful humanity. 

The doctrinal discussions which Zwingle incorporates in 
this work, we touch upon but slightly. A religious feeling 
is manifest throughout them. To the last he remained 
faithful to his doctrine concerning the Lord's Supper, inas- 
mucli as he continued to deny, in the writing to which we 
are at present referring, the corporeal presence of Christ in 
the bread. His view of the sacrament had deejjened, how- 
ever, as is evident from the fact that the idea of a spiritual 
participation therein is brought forward more distinctly and 
prominently here than at the beginning of the Eucharistic 
controversy. ISTevertlieless, he still continues to regard trust 
in Christ Himself as the all-important matter. As bread 
sustains human life, and as wine makes man cheerful, so 
Christ restores the soul that was formerly destitute of all 
hope — He sustains and cheers it. It is faith that makes us 
capable of receiving the bread not as mere bread, but in 
its higher signification,^ according to which Christ is made 

^ Qui jam non panis, sed Christus est nignlficatlone. An ideal transformation, 
such as was taught in the ancient Church. 


present to iis. Not only tliis communion witli the Lord, but 
also the communion of Christians with one another, is set 
forth by Zwingie as a special blessing attendant upon the 
Lord's Supper. As bread is produced through the mingling 
of many grains of wheat, and as wine is made by a confluence 
of juice from many grapes, so the body of the Church is 
formed of an infinite number of members, being made 
through one faith in Christ, which faith is the product of one 
Spirit, a temple of the Holy Ghost.^ 

For the benefit of the king, Zwingie endeavours to set 
forth the relation of faith to works very plainly. Faith he 
regards as that religious disposition which confers value upon 
external actions. Where faith is lacking, there is a decrease 
in the value of the act performed. God can take pleasure 
in such works only as proceed from faith. In like manner, 
says Zwingie, the king would look with distrust upon the 
finest work that any one could execute for him, if lie knew 
that it was not the offspring of faith, i.e. of an honest and 
loyal disposition ; he would suspect that it covered some 
perfidy, some egotistical design. It is in this sense, he con- 
cludes, that we nmst apprehend the saying, " What is not of 
faith is sin." 

In the section on eternal life, there is one passage that 
gave offence to some persons — to Luther especially — at the 
time when it was written, and which has since Zwingie's 
day shocked a great number of orthodox people. When the 
Eeformer directs the king to the contemplation of eternity, he 
refers not only to the pious of the Old and New Covenants, 
to the old and the new Adam (Christ), to the patriarchs, 
prophets, and apostles, — not merely even to the pious 
ancestors of the king, from Saint Louis onward, and backward 
to the Pepins, — but he also mentions among the blessed of 
the other Avorld, Hercules, Theseus, Socrates, Aristides, Anti- 
gonus, Numa, Camillus, the Catos, and the Scipios. " In 

^ The doctrine of the Eucharist is discussed at still greater length in the 


short," he continues, " no upright man has ever lived, no 
pious lieart, no faithful soul has ever existed, from the be- 
ginning to the end of the world, whom thou wilt not see 
yonder in the presence of God." 

The mention of mythological personages in this connection 
is attributable to the Humanistic bent of Zwingle's mind ; 
nor should any one insist upon calling the author of the 
above - cited lines to as rigorous an account, in such a 
poetico-rhetorical flight of fancy, as if he were engaged in the 
statement of some dogmatical proposition. However we regard 
the words, they bear witness to the large-hearted liberality 
of the Eeformer. 

It is unnecessary for me to describe the impression which 

the news of the defeat at Cappel produced at Zurich. I 

shall say nothing of those who bewailed fathers, husbands, 

sons, and brothers among the slain ; nothing of Zwingle's 

widow, to whose manifold and grievous losses I have before 

alluded. But when to such calamities as the above, the pain 

of being misunderstood is superadded, — when the suffering of 

loss is followed by reproaches concerning things that it is 

not in the power of man alone to avert, — the grief of the 

afflicted is doubled. Such was the case at Zurich after the 

battle of Cappel. The measures of the Government were 

then most bitterly censured, and great blame was cast upon 

Zwingle and other preachers, who, it was declared, had fanati- 

cized the people by their discourses, and seduced them to rash 

and hazardous undertakings. Many a man who before had, 

perhaps, been loudest in his carpings at the Government for 

not displaying a more courageous spirit, now accused the 

rulers of fool-hardiness, and declared that he had foreseen 

the unfortunate issue of the enterprise from the outset. 

Many another, however, buried his grief in his own bosom, 

thinking, it may be, that he would best honour the memory 

of the fallen, if, in fidelity and obedience to evangelical 

truth, he learned to humble himself under the mighty hand 

of God. 


Both parties had now become weary of a war in which, 
literally speaking, brother fought against brother ;^ winter 
came on and disinclined either side to longer sojourn in the 
field. On the 16tli of November a second religious peace 
was accordingly concluded at Teynikon, in the canton of 
Zug. It is needless for us to specify the various conditions 
of this peace ; suffice it to say that the leading stipulation 
was mutual tolerance. The costs of the war were settled by 

Let us now glance for a moment at the disturbed condition 
of affairs in Solothurn. In that city, as we have already 
seen, the majority had clung to the Catholic faith ; notwith- 
standing this, however, a Reformed party of no inconsiderable 
strength had arisen, and had obtained permission to hold a 
weekly service in the church of the Franciscans, from which, 
also, the images and decorations were removed. Berthold 
Haller, of Bern, had likewise been invited to spend some 
time in the city, and measures were taken for a religious 
conference. But when, from anxiety at these innovations, 
the image of St. Ursus began to sweat, the Catholics, regard- 
ing this artifice of the priests as a miracle, formed the more 
earnest resolutions to put a stop to heresy. Such was the 
aspect of affairs at the outbreak of the war. In the country, 
the evangelical faith had a larger number of adherents. Both 
from the country and the city, troops were despatched to 
Cappel in aid of the Eeformed. After peace was declared, 
the five cantons demanded that Solothurn should either pay 
eight hundred crowns as its share in defraying the expenses 
of the war, or take measures for the suppression of the 
rehgious services of the Pteformed wherever they had been 
introduced. The Catholics very naturally chose the latter 
alternative, and preparations were made for the forcible 
expulsion of the adherents of the new faith from Solothurn. 

1 This was the case with the two Goldlis. 

2 For particulars, see Bullingee, vol. iii. ; HoTTiNGEK, I.e. pp. 422 sqq. ; 
and MoRiKOFER, ii. p. 443. 


Matters at length arrived at sucli a crisis that the Catholics 
stationed themselves with a loaded cannon in front of the 
house where the Reformed held their meetings. Thereupon 
IMayor Nicholas Wenge took his stand before the mouth of 
the cannon, exclaiming, " If burgher blood Ls to be shed, let 
mine flow first ! " This resolute act produced a powerful 
impression throughout the city. Piecourse to arms was thus 
prevented, but the Reformed party sustained defeat here also ; 
indeed, from the day of the battle of Cappel, a reaction of no 
little strength set in, in various districts of Switzerland, in 
favour of Catholicism. 

Zwingle was soon followed by other leaders of the Refor- 
mation. The Bernese Reformer Francis Kolb, the coadjutor 
of Haller, and a correspondent of Zwingle' s, was at the battle 
of Cappel in the capacity of chaplain ; he also had uttered 
many woi'ds of rebuke, ill received by those to whom they 
were addressed. He did not fall in the battle, nor did he 
die of wounds there received, but of a broken heart ^ some 
years later (1535). 

CEcolampadius, who had kept aloof from the battle-field, 
did not long survive his friend Zwingle. The news of the 
death of the latter so powerfully affected him, weighed down 
as he was with the cares of his office, as to occasion a severe 
shock to his already shattered health. A malignant inflam- 
matory disorder^ hastened his end, which was worthy of his 
life. On the 21st of November, he said to his family: "Do 
not grieve, my beloved ! I am not leaving you for ever. I 
am but passing from this vale of sorrow to the better and 
eternal life. I ought to rejoice at the thought that I shall 
soon be in the abode of everlasting bliss." He then partook 

^ See BuLLiNGER, iii. pp. 213 and 263. 

^ On the nature of his disease {anthrax in osse sacra), and still more on his 
lovely Christian departure, compare the letter of his frie.nd and colleague, Simon 
Grynseus, to Wolfgang Capito. This letter is inserted as the narrative of an 
eye-witness, De vita et obitu (Ecolampadii, in the preface to the edition of 
CEcolampadius' Commentary on Ezekiel (Argent. 1534), iv. ; it may also be 
found in the Epp. ZwiiKjlii et Gi^c. Com p. Hekzog, QCcolampad. ii. pp. 246 


of the Lord's Supper in company with his wife, their relatives, 
and household servants. " This holy supper," he observed, 
" is a token of my true faith in Christ Jesus, my Lord, my 
Saviour, and my Eedeemer ; it is a faithful token of love, 
left us by Him. Let it be my last farewell to you." On the 
following day he assembled his colleagues about his bed and 
besought them to seek the welfare of the Church. He 
reminded them of the salvation purchased for us by Christ, 
admonished them to walk in His footprints, and to be the 
more loyal in their love to Him and to those for whom He 
died in the increasing darkness and turbulence of the times. 
He charged them to be his witnesses that he had had the 
prosperity of the Church at heart, and had not, as his 
enemies declared, been its seducer to apostasy. His col- 
leagues grasped him by the hand and solemnly promised to 
cherish the interest of the Church. The day before his 
death, he had his children brought to him, and told them to 
love God, their heavenly Father ; he also charged their mother 
and other relatives to be careful that the children harmonized 
in character with their significant names (Eusebius, Aletheia, 
Irene), that they might grow up pious, truthful, and peaceable. 
The last night of his life now approached. All the clergy 
were assembled about his bed. Of a friend who came in, he 
inquired whether he brought him any news ; on receiving a 
negative answer, he pleasantly remarked : " Then I will tell 
you something new ; I shall soon be with the Lord Christ." 
When he was asked if the light annoyed him, he pointed to 
his heart, saying, " Here is light enough." The day was 
just breaking when, with the sigh, " Lord Jesus, help me ! " 
CEcolampadius breathed his last. The ten clergymen who 
were present had fallen on their knees, and accompanied the 
parting soul with silent prayers. Thus, on the 24th of 
November 1531,^ CEcolampadius passed away, at the age of 

^ Concerning the date of his death, about which there is some difference of 
opinion (it being variously given as 21st and 23d November and 1st December), 
see Herzog, I.e. p. 252, note. 


forty-nine. His grave is in the cathedral, close to that of 
the Burgomaster Jacob Meyer and that of Simon Gryn?eus. 
Foolish stories concerning his death were spread abroad by 
his religious opponents ; ^ to these idle tales, we regret to 
say, Luther lent an ear. 

The character of (Ecolampadius is neither as imposing as 
Luther's nor as energetic as Zwingle's. He reminds us more 
of Melanchthon, although he did not attain to his greatness. 
Still, though he must be classed with the Reformers of the 
second rank, he filled with honour the position assigned him 
by God. He may more fitly be compared with the fathers of 
the Church than with the prophets ; and such a comparison 
would be the more apposite, since the study of the patristic 
writings was advanced by him. His preaching, though not 
remarkably powerful in its style, was calculated to produce a 
permanent effect upon its hearers. His most conspicuous 
virtue was fidelity to God and man. He frequently repeated 
the saying, that no man who had laid his hand to the plough 
should look back ; and in accordance with that sentiment he 
lived and laboured. The high estimation in which he was held 
by his contemporaries is evident from the fact that he was 
called to Zurich to succeed Zwingie. He became his successor 
in another sense. 

Zwingle's position was assumed by Henry Bullinger — that 
of O^^colampadius by Oswald Myconius. Both of these men 
deserve our attention for a few moments. 

Henry Bullinger was the son of Dean Bullinger of Brem- 
garten,^ whom we have already mentioned in connection with 

^ A Lucerne manuscript relates that he LiiJ violent hands on himself, from 
chagrin at the issue of the battle of Cappel. The malicious CochltBus caused 
it to be reported that he had been carried off by Satan. 

2 In spite of the law of celibacy, the elder Bullinger lived with Anna 
AViederkehr in a matrimonial connection which was certainly not sanctioned 
by the Church. Such conscientious marriages were not unfrequently con- 
tracted by " the purer and more earncst-mijided " of the priests of that period. 
See Sal. Hess, Lebensgeschichte BuUingers, ii., Zurich, 1828-29; and Karl 
Pestalozzi, Ifeinrich Bullinger, Leben und ausgewdhlte Schriften, Elberfeld, 
1858 (vol. V. of the Vdter und Begr'under). 


Samson, the seller of indulgences. After receiving his first 
scanty instruction in the school of his native place, Henry, 
when twelve years old, was sent to Emmerich, in the 
Netherlands, to be educated by the " Brethren of the Common 
Life." By them he was introduced to the study of the 
classics. The discipline in the " Beehive " (the name by 
which the house of the Brethren was known) was exceedingly 
severe. The inmates were permitted to speak nothing but 
Latin. Like Luther at Eisenach, BuUinger was obliged to 
earn his bread at Emmerich by singing from door to door. 
In common with the Saxon Eeformer, furthermore, he believed 
that he would please God by entering one of the monastic 
orders. He accordingly resolved to choose the strictest of 
them all — that of the Carthusian monks. He, however, did 
not, like Luther, consummate his purpose. At the University 
of Cologne, BuUinger not only became familiar with the 
writings of the church fathers and the Schoolmen, but at 
this very seat of the " obscurants " he made acquaintance 
with the productions of Luther and Melanchthon. The Loci 
Communes of the latter (see chapter vii.) impressed him most 
deeply. From this time (which was in the years 1521 and 
1522) he devoted himself to an earnest study of the Bible. 
In April 1522, after having passed six years in the Ehine 
provinces, he returned to quiet Bremgarten. In the Cister- 
cian monastery of Cappel, which was near his native place, 
he obtained, at the beginning of the year 1523, under the 
auspices of the pious and enlightened abbot, "Wolfgang Joner 
(surnamed Eiippli), employment as teacher in the school con- 
nected with the cloister. To the boys he explained the Latin 
classics (Cicero, Sallust, and Virgil), and at the same time 
daily delivered theological lectures to adults on the writings 
of Erasmus and Melanchthon. These lectures were attended 
not only by the abbot and the monks, but admission was also 
offered to every one in the vicinity. Departing from the 
prevalent custom of employing Latin for all literary purposes, 
BuUinger lectured in his native German. His reformatory 


sentiments soon became evident. Instead, however, of their 
ahenating from him the abbot, who was a strict churchman, 
the latter was more and more won over to the doctrine of the 
gospel. Between the reverend dignitary of more than fifty- 
winters and the schoolmaster of nineteen, a lovely brotherly 
relation sprang up. The circle of Bullinger's intimates like- 
wise included the prior of the cloister, Peter Simmler of 
Eheinau, the distinguished priest Wernher Steiner of Zug, 
and others. The report of Bullinger's teachings and of the 
abbot's sanction thereof brought the cloister under suspicion 
of heresy among the friends of the ancient order of things ; 
nor were there wanting among these some who played the 
part of spies upon the monastery and its inmates. 

While attending the religious conferences at Zurich, Bul- 
linger contracted a friendship with Zwingle, whose sermons 
had already made a lasting impression on him. Though 
independent research and the study of the writings of Luther 
and Melanchthon had, without Zwingle's mediation, resulted 
for BuUinger in a clearer insight into divine truth, it must 
necessarily have afforded him great delight to meet with a 
confirmation of his principles from the great Swiss Eeformer. 
Zwingle's " forcible, sound, and scriptural teachings," Bullinger 
declares, " greatly strengthened my convictions." During the 
remainder of Zwingle's life, each of these two men formed the 
complement of the other, as was tlie case with Luther and 
Melanchthon. Wiiile Bullinger was still at Cappel, where he 
remained for six years, he manifested great fecundity as an 
author. Upwards of seventy different treatises ilowed from 
his pen. The chief purport of these writings was always tliat 
the supreme authority in matters of faith is to be met witli 
in the Holy Scriptures, and that the sum of all salvation and 
blessedness is to be found in Christ. He likewise strove to 
confirm others in these principles.^ Independently of the 
Eucharistic controversy between Luther and the Swiss Keformers, 

1 Seu Rulliiigei-'s letter to Pastor Matthias at Seengen on tlie Hallwylersee,\lozzi, p. 31. 


and purely in view of the Romish mass, BuUinger in 1525, 
the same year in which the controversy broke out, espoused 
the same views in regard to the Lord's Supper which were 
defended by Zwingle and CEcolampadius against Luther and 
his adherents.^ 

BuUinger likewise assisted Zwingle in opposing the Anabap- 
tists. He also became the friend of CEcolampadius. After 
the reform of the cloister of Cappel had been effected, Bul- 
linger (in 1527) married Anna Adlischweiler of Zurich, 
formerly a nun in the convent of Oetenbach, which, like 
that of Cappel, had, at the time of which we speak, been 
suppressed. For the edification and instruction of his wife, 
BuUinger (in 1528) wrote a treatise "Concerning Female 
Education, and how a Daughter should order her Life and 
Conduct." ^ The behaviour of BuUinger exerted a reflex 
influence upon his father, the Dean of Bremgarten, who was 
stiU living, and who, in a sermon delivered in February 1529, 
now declared himself positively in favour of the Eeformation. 
The people of Bremgarten were divided in their religious 
sentiments. The adherents of Eome succeeded in deposing 

^ For the benefit of Anna Schwiter, a simple burgheress of Ziig, he wrote a 
treatise "Against the bread of idols, and concerning the bread of thanksgiving ; 
how manifold the abuse thereof is, and what is the just and true use of it. " 
In regard to transubstantiation, he would not accept the argument so frequently 
drawn from the divine omnipotence, declaring that all manner of absurdities 
might with equal justice be delended by the assertion that all things are 
possible to God. According to this mode of argumentation, an ox must be 
able to fl}'. The body of Christ enclosed in the bread, he regarded as on a par 
with a god contained in a pyx, in the monstrance, or in any shrine or receptacle 
whatever. A "Christ of bread " he rated no higher than a wooden Jupiter or 
a brazen Mars. Thus, before BuUinger became acquainted with Luther's view, 
he combated impanation as well as transubstantiation. The two doctrines were 
held by him to be on an equal footing. The latter he attacked with great 
sharpness and excessive bitterness, in the following words : — " We snatch the 
body of Christ from heaven, whither it is ascended, and drag it about as we 
choose ; we chase it, to the sound of a bell, from one temple to another, from 
one village or farmhouse to another, and for every one who comes to us we can 
make a God." That such utterances must wound many pious minds, and that 
such and similar statements might displease even deeper natures, such as 
Luther's, every unprejudiced person must admit. 

^ On the cover were the words: "This little book and its contents pertain 
only to my wife." 


the aged deau,^ but the reformatory party indemnified them- 
selves for this triumph of their opponents by calling the 
schoolmaster of Cappel, the son of the deposed clergyman, to 
be their preacher. With this circumstance was connected 
the prosecution of the Eeformation in Bremgarten, the aboli- 
tion of the mass and of images. Hence we may call Bullinger 
the Eeformer of this little town, which, by its geographical 
position, formed an outpost in that struggle which was to be 
decided on the field of Cappel. Bullinger shared in the sad 
experiences of the war. On the occasion of the general Diet 
at Bremgarten (August 1531), he exerted all the powers of 
his eloquence in the endeavour to depict before the eyes of 
the assembled confederates the horrors of intestine war. He 
warned them against precipitancy. Not with the sword, but 
with the weapons of the Spirit, would he have the conflict 
decided. On this point he was in full sympathy with Luther. 
Again, on the 10 th of August, in the presence of the two 
deputies from Bern, he had an earnest interview with Zwingle 
in the parsonage at Bremgarten, and at its close accompanied 
his friend to the next village. Zwingle took leave of him 
three times, with tears in his eyes, and said to him, " My dear 
Henry, may God preserve you. Be faithful to the Lord Christ 
and to His Church." This was the last time that the two 
ever saw each other. The unfortunate issue of the battle of 
Cappel operated disastrously upon Bremgarten. The dismissal 
of its preachers was imposed upon it by the unhappy treaty 
of peace which succeeded the battle. In the night of the 
20th and 21st November 1531, Bullinger, in company with 
his aged but stiU vigorous father, and his colleague, Gervasius 
Schuler, set out for Zurich. He was followed, a few days 
later, by his brave wife, who was obliged to fight her way 
through the guards at the gate of Bremgarten. The fugitives 
were hospitably received by Werner Steiner, who, having been 
driven from Zug some time before on account of his faith, had 
taken up his abode at Zurich, in the neighbourhood of the 
1 He, however, speedily found another charge in a neiglibouring parish. 


minster. The spirit of mingled despondency and irritation 
which at this time prevailed in that deeply-humiliated city, 
entered unpleasantly into the personal experience of Steiner. 
Any man who bore the title of " parson " was looked upon 
with suspicion by either side ; for the idea had become rife 
that all the calamities under which the burghers were at 
present groaning, owed their origin to priests and preachers. 
Even Leo Juda found it necessary to conceal himself, with 
the aid of faithful friends ; and the schoolmaster, Oswald 
Myconius, scarcely dared show himself in the street when 
engaged in the pursuit of his harmless avocation. But 
Bullinger, who was then in the vigour of youth (he was 
twenty-seven years old), did not permit himself to be dis- 
couraged. He made his appearance in the pulpit, and spoke 
words of encouragement to the troubled Evangelicals. It 
seemed to many as if Zwingle had risen again in this new 
phcenix. What, then, could be more natural than that 
Bullinger should be chosen as the successor of the slain 
Reformer? On the 9th of December 1531, he was unani- 
mously appointed to the rectorship of the cathedral by the 
whole of the Greater Council.^ At his election it had been 
declared to him that the people desired a peace-loving preacher 
— one who would " proclaim the word of God in a virtuous, 
friendly, and Christian manner," and would not meddle with 
secular affairs. Bullinger accepted this condition, with the 
proviso that the word of God should in no wise be bound 
thereby. He, however, assumed only the pastoral office of 
Zwingle, The theological professorship was conferred upon 
the learned Buchanan (Bibliander). 

Bullinger's position was by no means an easy one. The 
anti-reformatory party, which now numbered among its 
adherents many who had formerly professed attachment to 
the new doctrine, had taken advantage of the dejection of the 
civil authorities to involve them in reactionary measures. All 

^ His friends styled him Antktes in their letters, but this had not j-et become, 
the customary title. See Pestalozzi, I.e. p. 79. 


manner of movements were under way on the borders of the 
Lake of Zurich. Immediately after the battle of Cappel, in 
November 1531, a public meeting had been held at Meilen, 
on the eastern shore of the lake. A complaint was presented 
to the Government, requesting the abolition of innovations. 
It was demanded that the " interloping parsons who had 
flocked " to the canton should be cast adrift, and that peace- 
loving pastors should be installed in their places. Some few 
in the city of Zurich returned to the old faith. Peter Fiissli, 
a member of the council, visited Einsiedeln at Easter 1532, 
for the purpose of confessing. Mass was secretly celebrated 
in a cellar. Eome seized the favourable opportunity now 
offered to her, and, through her legate EnniuS; invited the 
Government to return to the bosom of the ancient Catholic 
Church. On the Wednesday after Trinity Sunday 1532, the 
Government, it is true, issued a fresh mandate against the 
mass, and therein promised " confidently to abide " by the 
truth as once discerned,^ but the efficiency of its measures was 
much diminished by a reactionary party. On St. John's day 
of this same year, Leo Juda, who had been for so long a time 
the assistant of Zwingle, delivered a cutting sermon (in a style 
suggestive of John the Baptist, whom the day commemorated), 
in which he accused the Government of no less a thing than 
treason to the truth and adulteration of the faith. " Ye," he 
declared, addressing himself to the rulers, " are shepherds of 
God's flock, and as such it is incumbent upon you to guard 
your sheep, that God has entrusted to you, from wolves, 
whatever detriment may ensue to yourselves. Ye should not 
suffer them to be damaged in honour, body, or estate ; much 
less ought ye to permit their souls to suffer injury, or allow 
them to be despoiled of any particle of divine truth. He 
who flees when the wolf attacks the flock is not a faithful 
shepherd. And now since ye, the shepherds of the people, 
are sleeping, / must do my duty, — I must bark like the 
shepherd's watchful dog, and arouse you. Ye " (he proceeded 

' BULLINGER, iii. pp. 315 sqrj. 


further) " have ejected from the council pious and upright 
men, honourable citizens, good old burghers of Zurich, who 
have always acted with fidelity towards the word of God and 
the State. Ye have called them clamourers when they lifte 1 
up their voices against you. On the other hand, men whom 
aforetime ye punished for adultery and other misdeeds, de- 
claring them to have forfeited their honour, ye now have again 
elevated to an honourable standing, have advanced them to 
preferment, and placed them on the judicial bench and in the 
council." This discourse of " Master Leu " [Lion] occasioned 
much commotion. The matter was taken before the Council 
of Two Hundred. Besides Leo, Bullinger was summoned to 
appear before this body, he having expressed himself in 
similar terms. The defence of the two men was so fraught 
with power and dignity that the Government not only dis- 
missed them uncensured, but even requested them to continue 
to proclaim the word of God as they had done hitherto. It 
was added further, that if the preachers should at some future 
time be desirous of laying any complaint before the Govern- 
ment, they were at liberty to go and " knock at the door of 
the council chamber, when admission would at once be granted 

Ennius, seeing that he could not prevail upon the Govern- 
ment of Zurich to abandon the evangelical faith, endeavoured 
to kindle the wrath of the Catholic cantons afresh. For this 
purpose he availed himself of the mandate against the mass, 
issued by the rulers of Zurich. In this mandate the sacrifice 
of the mass was called a diminution of the merit of Christ — 
language which the opposite party construed into a violation of 
the treaty of peace, by the provisions of which each party was 
forbidden to speak insultingly of the religion of the other. Hence 
fresh negotiations arose between Zurich and the five cantons, 
continuing until the matter was finally settled in April 1533. 

Oswald Myconius,^ the successor of CEcolampadius at Basel, 

1 Melchior Kirchhofke, Osivald Myconius, Antistes der Basics- Kirche, 
Zurich, ISlSj and the author's Ze6e?i (Ecolampads tind Myconius,~£X\>Q\iQ\(\., 1859. 


was more favourably situated than was Bullinger at Zurich. 
Myconius, whose real name was Geisshiisler, was Lorn at 
Lucerne in the year 1488 ; the exact day of his hirth is 
unknown. After completing his studies at Basel, he was for 
some time a schoolmaster in that city. On returning to 
Lucerne, he, together with Xylotectus (Zimmermann) and 
Jodocus Kilchmeyer, gave expression to reformatory senti- 
ments, in consequence of which he was obliged to leave the 
city in 1523.-^ After a brief sojourn at Einsiedeln, he accepted 
a call from Zwingle to the foundation school of the Frauen- 
miinster at Zurich. In a school he was in his true element. 
Thomas Plater, of the Valais, whose originality of mind we 
have already had occasion to mention, was his pupil, his 
intellectual son. In addition to teaching, Myconius sometimes 
preached, and further took part in the general religious 
conflict by his writings. Upon one occasion he defended the 
people of Zurich against the attacks of the priesthood of Inner 
Switzerland.^ On the death of Zwingle, he left Zurich and 
removed to Basel. In the latter city he was at first pastor of 
St. Alban's, thus filling a vacancy occasioned by tlie death of 
Jerome Botanus ;^ at the decease of (Ecolampadius, however, 
he was advanced to the chief pastorate of Basel. In August 
1532 he was also created professor of the New Testament. 
In his modesty he declined the title of Doctor, on the plea 
that Christ forbade His disciples to be called Eabbi (Matt. 
xxiii. 8), saying that one is their Master, and all they are 
brethren. A special chair had accordingly to be established 
for the degreeless teacher. 

We can here no longer follow Myconius' efforts in the 
cause of ecclesiastical reform. Be it observed only, that it 
was under his leadership that the Confession of the Church of 
Basel, a sketch of which had been prepared by CEcolampadius, 

' See chap. xiv. 

- O^waldi Myconii, Luce.rnani ad Saccrdotes Helcetkv, qui T'njurinis male 
lo(}nuidur suasoria, nt male loque demnanf. 

■' Tliis faithful colleague of (Ecolampadius was one of those who fell in the 
battle of Cappel. 


was finally completed, and, by order of tlie Government, 
printed and published, and adopted by the burghers at the 
halls of the different guilds. This was Tlie First Confession of 
Basel, of the year 1534;'^ under the name of Milllmsana it 
was also adopted by the neighbouring city of Miihlhausen. It 
is remarkable for its great simplicity and mildness. Its 
strongest opposition is called forth by the Anabaptists, who 
at that time were still regarded as a dangerous " rabble." 
How little the letter of this Confession was intended to be 
binding upon all future ages, is manifest from the conclusion, 
which is as follows : — " Finally, we would subject this our 
Confession to the verdict of the divine scriptures of the Bible ; 
and we do hereby profess our readiness at any and every 
time most thankfully to render obedience to God and His 
word, if it shall be proved to us from Holy Writ that our 
doctrine is in any point erroneous." 

^ See tlie author's Geschichte der Busier Confession, Basel, 1828. The Con- 
fession consists of twelve articles. Article 1 treats of God (Trinity, election) ; 
article 2, of man (the fall, original sin) ; article 3, of God's care over us (divine 
revelation down to the coming of Christ) ; article 4, of Christ, true God and 
true man ; article 5, of the Church and the sacraments ; article 6, of the Lord's 
Supper (Christ the soul's nourishment unto eternal life : the body of Christ, 
however, not enclosed in the bread and wine of the sacrament) ; article 7, of 
the use of excommunication (the Church excommunicates in order to the re- 
formation of the excommunicated person, and readmits him to its fellowship 
upon his repentance) ; article 8, of rulers ; article 9, of faith and works ; article 
10, of the last day; article 11, of commandments and non-commandments 
(festivals, holy days, and the marriage of priests) ; article 12, against the Ana- 







"^XTE have not yet spoken of that part of Switzerland 
T T which is collectively designated as Eomanic or, in 
popular parlance, French Switzerland.^ There, also, the con- 
llict between the old and new, between priestly authority and 
independence of the spiritual yoke, had been in course of 
preparation. The man who first comes forth prominently as 
a Eeformer of this portion of Switzerland is William Farel, 
whom we have lost sight of since the time when he challenged 
the University of Basel to a disputation (1524). He sub- 
sequently visited Strassburg, where he contracted a friendship 
with Capito and Bucer. In the early part of November 1526, 
after experiencing a variety of fortunes, Farel, on the advice of 
Haller of Bern, took up his abode at Aigle, in the lower 
valley of the Ehone, on the borders of Bern and Valais. He 
there laboured in the modest vocation of a schoolmaster, call- 
ing himself Ursinus, in allusion to the arms of Bern, under 
whose protection he stood. Q^colampadius, in a letter under 
date 27th December, congratulates him on his new office, and 

^ For information concerning the political history of this part of Switzerland, 
sec VuiLi.EMix, Geschichte der Eldyeuossen wciJirend des 16 und 17 Jahrhund('rt.<i 
vol. viii. of Joii. VON Muller'.s Geschichte der schiveizeri.schen Eidcjenossen- 
scha/t), Zurich, 1842. For its ecclesiastical history, see KuciiAT, Histoire de la 
/'('formation de la Suisse (Vuillemin's edition). For biographies of Farel, sec 
note on p. 330 of vol. i. 


encourages him to proceed with equal firmness and discretion, 
looking to the Lord, who without doubt would show him the 
right way. Farel encountered great opposition. The local 
magistrates forbade him to preach, despite the permission 
which he had received from Bern. The Bishop of Sitten 
hurled the thunderbolt of excommunication against preachers 
who were vagabondizing about the country. Fanatical monks 
zealously opposed him. Farel, however, was not to be turned 
aside by any of these things. He preached, also, in the 
vicinity of Aigle, at Olon, Bex, and elsewhere. As he was 
holding forth one day at Olon, he was disturbed by a clamorous 
multitude with drums, etc. Eaging women also fell upon him 
like furies, and plucked out his beard. 

The favourable issue of the disputation at Bern (1528), 
which Farel personally attended, gave him courage to press 
forward. The mandate of reform was, however, by no means 
cheerfully received by the mass of the people. When posted 
on the church doors at Aigle, it was torn down by the popu- 
lace. The disturbance was augmented when the lords of Bern 
forcibly removed altars and images. Farel was besieged in his 
pulpit by the raging mob. The Bernese Government sent a 
deputy, named Paidolph Nitgeli, to restore peace and quiet to 
the district, but his efforts at first proved fruitless. The in- 
habitants of the valley of Ormond resisted the innovations 
with especial violence. They declared that they would choose 
another ruler rather than abandon their old faith. Bern gave 
them until Whitsuntide to consider their determination, and 
they finally discontinued their opposition. The Bernese 
Government executed summary vengeance on those who had 
been guilty of promoting insubordination. The chief men of 
the parish, who had favoured the disorders, were deposed ; the 
vicar of the old church was banished from the place ; and the 
benefices were given to evangelical preachers. The people by 
degrees became accustomed to the novelties which had been 
thus forced upon them. 

Farel was by nature more fitted to be a travelling preacher 


— a pioneer of the gospel — than a reformer quietly building 
away in one place. By the authorization of the Bernese 
magistracy, he went first to Murten [or ]\Iorat], and then to 
Biel, which latter town had some time previously accepted the 
doctrines of the Eeformation, and for that reason welcomed 
him all the more gladly, desiring that he might confirm the 
minds of the Evangelicals in the truth. Thence he proceeded 
to ISTeureville, on the Lake of Biel, 

Under commission of the Bernese Government, he next 
visited Lausanne, On the 31st of October 1529, he appeared 
before the council of that place, and presented his credentials 
as a preacher of the gospel. The matter was laid before the 
Council of Two Hundred, which body showed itself not un- 
favourably disposed towards Farel ; but the bishop stedfastly 
resisted the Eeformer, Farel returned for a time to Murten. 
He next directed his attention to the county of Neuchatel, and 
made his appearance first at Serrieres, about half a mile from 
the city of Neuchatel. There was a priest at the former place 
who was not entirely disinclined to the gospel, and who per- 
mitted the wandering evangelist to preach in the churchyard. 
There Farel accordingly held forth, mounted upon a stone, 
which is still pointed out as a memento of those days. 
Burghers from Neuchatel appeared among his auditors, and 
finally invited him to visit their city. He accepted this call, 
and preached in the market-place, in the streets, and public 
squares. There was something striking in his appearance. 
The little insignificant man, with a red and touzled beard and 
sunburnt visage, but with eyes that shot lightning, and a voice 
of thunder, combined an audacious and defiant air with his 
neglected exterior. Some he repelled ; others were attracted 
by him. While the monks cried shame upon him, the 
voice of the people was all the more urgent in requiring 
that he should speak. Novelty-seekers, as well as searchers 
after salvation, pressed upon the stranger, and never did 
his preaching fail to produce a profound impression. But 
he was not yet able to remain in Neuchatel. It would be 


impossible for iis to follow him in all his journey ings hither 
and thither, in the excursions which he undertook, now to 
the valley of the Miinster, and again to the Vully, and else- 
where. Suffice it to say that while thus engaged he repeatedly 
returned to Neuchatel, and at length in the year 1530 
succeeded in establishing the Eeformation there. He had at 
first preached in the streets, but now the doors of the churches 
were gradually opened to him. He was first admitted to the 
hospital chapel, a circumstance which seemed to him to be 
significant. As Christ must needs be born in a stable, so, he 
said to himself, the gospel must take for its starting-point, at 
Neuchatel, the house of the infirm and sick. This thought 
furnished him with the theme for his first sermon. He did 
not, however, confine himself to words. He immediately pro- 
ceeded to action, and without long delay purged the church of 
its images. This act excited great commotion. The Bernese 
Government itself, in a letter to Farel, expressed its dis- 
approval of his too hasty procedure, and admonished him not 
to overstep the bounds prescribed him by the office of evan- 
gelist. But who, by a word, can extinguish a conflagration 
when it is once under way ? Excesses were committed in the 
vicinity of ISTeuchatel. On the festival of the Assumption of 
the Virgin, Farel visited a village in the Val-de-Euz in company 
with a young Frenchman from Dauphiny. They entered the 
village church. Mass was read, and the congregation devoutly 
followed the motions of the celebrant with their eyes, while 
Farel stood in readiness to preach. This excited the indigna- 
tion of the young companion of the evangelist. He suddenly 
sprang towards the priest, snatched the host from his hands, 
and then turned to the people, crying : " This is not the God 
whom ye should worship ; He is in heaven above, in the 
majesty of the Father, and not in the hands of the priest." 
The congregation were silent from consternation. Farel 
seized the opportunity to speak. But the priest and his 
adherents flew to the bells and sounded an alarm. The 
people poured into the church from all quarters, and it was 


■with difiEiculty that Farel and his attendant could escape that 
abusive treatment which they had invited by their more than 
imprudent conduct. They, however, did not escape entirely 
unliarmed. As they were returning, evening having set in, 
they were attacked and beaten, in the vicinity of the castle of 
Valangin, by a throng of men and women armed with clubs. 
Priests also were amongst their assailants, Farel and his 
companion were conducted to the castle. As they were 
passing a chapel on their way thither, the multitude tried to 
compel them to prostrate themselves before an image of the 
Virgin, and implore her mercy. Wlien they refused to do 
this, and Farel again proclaimed the sin of idolatry and pointed 
to God as man's only helper in time of need, his head was 
dashed against a wall with such violence that the blood gushed 
forth, leaving stains that are said to have been visible for 
years afterwards. Both Farel and his attendant were com- 
mitted to prison. As soon as the people of Neuchatel heard 
of these occurrences, they demanded the liberation of the 
prisoners. The lords of Bern likewise required satisfaction at 
the hands of the Countess of Valangin for the wrongs which 
their preachers had suffered within her territory. An investi- 
gation was instituted, but no one was punished. The above 
is an instance in which religious zeal degenerated into blind 
passion on the one hand, and the savage brutality of the rabble 
on the other. 

By the end of October the conflict was to be decided in the 
city of Neuchatel. On the 2 2d of that month iconoclasm was 
inaugurated, and a number of images were mutilated. The 
next day (Sunday) Farel preached in the hospital church, 
which had long been too small to contain all the people wlio 
thronged to hear his sermons. On a sudden the preacher 
expressed his desire to repair to the principal church of the 
city, and there, without further delay, substitute the word of 
God for the mass. This proposal struck a responsive chord in 
the hearts of Farel's auditors. "To the church ! to tlie 
church ! " they shouted with one voice. Farel was at once 


hurried away by the crowd, and preacher and people quickly 
ascended the hill on which both the castle of Neuchatel and 
the church of Our Lady were situated. The canons in vain 
strove to hold the sanctuary against the intruders. The doors 
of the church were burst open, and the multitude pressed in. 
Farel advanced to the pulpit. This also the clergy attempted 
to defend, but were as before overpowered by the burghers. 
And then in the church of the Virgin, within which for four 
centuries Rome had reigned supreme,^ there was heard at last, 
from the mouth of an Evangelical preacher, the simple 
apostolic declaration of the gospel doctrine of salvation. An 
ancient chronicle states that the sermon delivered on this 
occasion was one of the most powerful ever preached by Farel. 
At the close of his discourse the voice of the assembled throng 
replied, " We are ready to follow the Evangelical doctrine ; 
both we and our children are resolved to die therein." This 
was certainly an impressive moment. But a less edifying 
scene followed it, as a tempest sometimes succeeds the dawn. 
" Away with the images ! away with them this instant ! " was 
the cry that resounded from the impetuous mass. And then 
began the work of destruction. Thirty chapels in the neigh- 
bourhood of the church were torn down — not an altar was left 
standing. The images were dashed to pieces, and the frag- 
ments thrown from the top of the rock, to find a grave beneath 
the waters of the Seyon. The wafers were taken from their 
receptacles and eaten like common bread. In vain did tlie 
governor, to whom the indignant canons and canonesses had 
appealed in their distress, endeavour to restore tranquillity. In 
matters of faith, the burghers declared, he had no right to 
command. Nor did the Catholic party gain anything by the 
governor's report, in which he remarked that the whole move- 
ment had originated with some hot-headed young men lately 
returned from the war, and stated further that the majority of 
the burghers were attached to the ancient faith. It was 

1 [The church was built hy Count Uh-ic ii. four centuries before. See 
D'AuBiGNE, vol. iv. p. 296.— Til.] 


resolved that the ballot should decide whether such was the 
case. This resolution taken, the adherents of Eeform de- 
manded that the Bernese should be represented by deputies 
on the occasion. Commissioners from Bern accordingly- 
appeared on the 4th of November. After some lengthy and 
painful discussions the votes were taken, and the majority, 
by an excess of but eighteen, however, was found to be 
on the side of the supporters of the Eeformation. The lords 
of Bern then admonished one and all to preserve the 
peace. The abolition of the mass was confirmed ; it was 
ordered, however, that the clergy should not be molested, 
and that the regular tithes and imposts should be duly paid 
as before. 

Farel continued his labours as a travelling preacher. 
People from Avenches and Payerne would visit Murten, 
where he was for a time, from curiosity, that they might hear 
the preacher who excited such a sensation : they went to 
scoff, thinking themselves proof against every attack that 
could be made upon their ancient doctrines and customs ; 
but many were captivated by the preacher's words, and 
returned pricked to the heart and filled with other thoughts 
than those which had occupied them Mdien they set out. 
Farel next preached at Avenches. He there met with oppo- 
sition from the monks and the Bishop of Lausanne, but was 
again protected by the mighty arm of Bern. The commis- 
sioners of that canton, under whose escort he had entered 
Avenches, requested him to accompany them to Orbe and 
preach there also. A year previous to this time, he had 
opposed an indulgence preacher at the latter place, on which 
occasion the first fountain-basin that he met with served him 
in the stead of a pulpit ; stormy were the scenes that then 
attended his proclamation of the gospel. The same spirit 
of resistance was now manifested when, at the close of 
vespers, he ascended the pulpit in the church at Orbe. His 
words were received with hisses and whistling, with howls 
and the stamping of feet, and every term of opprobrium in 


the French vocabulary was showered upon him.^ Farel did 
not lose his composure, however. The darts of his opposers 
glanced aside from him. His coolness increased the fury of 
the raging multitude. The tumult continued. It was im- 
possible for the preacher to finish his discourse. The Bernese 
bailiff found it necessary to take Farel under his protection, 
and escort him, arm in arm, to his own house. 

A number of similar scenes occurred which it is needless 
for us to describe. At Orbe, as elsewhere, it was the authori- 
tative command of Bern that finally subdued the insubordinate. 
Shall we, however, in our disapprobation of the violent 
measures resorted to, refuse to recognise the hand of Provi- 
dence in events which, to an observant eye, discover traces of 
divine governance, even though the wrong-doing of both the 
parties concerned in them may readily mislead the judgment 
of the student of history ? From this very town of Orbe, which 
had become the theatre of distressing conflicts, there went forth 
a man whom God had chosen to be His instrument in the 
further spread of the Eeformation in Eomanic Switzerland. 

Despite all the opposition of the multitude, there had 
gradually gathered about Farel at Orbe a faithful little band 
of hearers. One of those who sat at the feet of Farel was a 
young man who had been impressed by the gospel at Paris. 
This youth, whose name was Peter Viret,^ was born at Orbe 
in 1511. He was the son of a cloth-shearer, and was the 
possessor of sound learning and pleasing manners ; nor was 
he deficient in the gift of eloquence. At the solicitation 
of Farel, he ventured for the first time to preach in his 
native town on the 6th of May 1531. He then, in com- 
pany with Farel, preached the gospel at Grandson, and 
afterwards at Lausanne. If Farel may, from his predomi- 
nant agency, be termed the Eeformer of Neuchatel, Viret may 
justly be entitled the Eeformer of Lausanne. But let us, 
in the first place, follow him, together with Farel, to Geneva. 

^ They called him chien, matin, heritique, diahle, etc. 

2 C. Schmidt, Wilhehn Farel uml Peter Viret, Elberfeld, 1810. 



This ancient city of the Allobroges/ situated at the mouth 
of the Khone, and at the very gates of Italy and France, 
whose destiny it was to become the third metropolis of the 
Eeformation (after Wittenberg and Zurich), with its venerable 
cathedral of St. Peter, said to have been built in the days 
of Clovis, was just at this time in a political ferment. 
There, as elsewhere, the bishops conjoined secular power with 
their spiritual authority. But they were not without powerful 
rivals, among whom were the Counts of Geneva, who dwelt 
in their strongholds in the vicinity of the city. For assistance 
against these, the bishop had had recourse to the dukes of 
the neighbouring territory of Savoy, who, as the lords-pro- 
tectors {vidames) of the city, held the castle on the Isle of 
the Ehone, and appointed bishops from their own house.^ In 
the year 1477, Geneva, for security against the encroach- 
ments both of the spiritual and the ducal power, concluded 
a burgh pact with Bern and Freiburg, In the sixteenth cen- 
tury two hostile parties were drawn up against each other, 
one of which, the Mamelukes, adhered to the duke, while 
the other, the Confederates {Eitgenots)^ were attached to 
Bern and Freiburg. Among the latter were the " Children of 

^ Spon, Histoire de Geneve, 4 vols., Geneva, 1730; Gaberel, Histoire de 
VEglise de Geneve, 2 vols., 1858. Contemporaneous accounts : A. Froment, 
Actes et gestes merveilleux de la cit6 de Geneve (eJ. Revilliod, 1854). From the 
opposite (Catholic) point of view : Jeanne de Jussieu (a nun), Le levain du 
Calvinisme au commencement de VMrisie de Geneve. Also biographies of Calvin, 
to be mentioned hereafter. See also Merle D'Aubigne, Geschichte der Refor- 
mation in Europa zu den Zeiten Calvins, Elberfeld, 1863 (Book i.) ; Vuillemin, 
I.e. ; and Kampsciiulte, in his Biography of Calvin, vol. i. pp. 1 sqq. 

^ Among these bishops there were some worthless men ; such, for instance, as 
Jean Louis, who was raised by Pius ii. to the episcopal see when but twelve 
years old, and who disgraced the office by vicious conduct. No higher was the 
standard of morality of Francis of Savoy, who was made bishop in 1482. 
Antoine Champion (1491), on the other hand, deserves to be numbered 
among the better class of bishops, among those who earnestly strove after a 
reformation of the Church. Like Christopher von Utenheim, Bishop of Basel, 
this Genevan bishop held a reformatory synod in 1493, at which salutary 
resolutions in reference to church discipline were adopted. See Gaberel, i. 
pp. 66 sqq. In the book just cited may also l)e found a number of instances 
illustrative of the dissoluteness of the clergj', especially those in regular orders. 

^ We shall discuss hereafter the question whether the word Huguenots comes 
from this, or has some other origin. 


Geneva/'^ the flower of that portion of the youth of the city 
who aspired after political independence. At the head of this 
body stood Philip Berthelier, whose opposition to the duke was 
punished by the loss of his head in May 1519. This event 
was followed by a reaction, which, however, was of short dura- 
tion. Berthelier was succeeded by Besangon Hugues. Under 
his influence, the alliance with Bern and Freiburg, which the 
duke had endeavoured to rupture, was formally renewed, and 
the Swiss faction triumphed in 1526. The dominion of the 
Mamelukes was at an end. Duke Charles iii. was obliged 
to leave the city, and a republican constitution was adopted. 
The authority of the bishop was also threatened. Not long 
before the time of which we speak. Bishop John [of Savoy] 
had been succeeded by Peter de la Baume, of the ancient 
Burgundian family of the Counts of Montrevel. He was a 
good-natured man and not destitute of cultivation, but was 
a great lover of magnificence and luxury, and was addicted 
to the pleasures of the table and the free use of good wines. 
Though there may be no proof that he was guilty of those 
grosser transgressions against morality of which report accused 
him, and which are recounted in some histories,^ he was 
nevertheless, by reason of his moral laxity and utter want of 
character, unable to cope with the storms of the times, which 
burst upon him as upon others. Casting himself first upon 
one party and again upon the other, he became the 
plaything of both, and at last fell a sacrifice to his own 

Among the reformatory characters of Geneva, one man is 
mentioned who has been classed among the forerunners of 
the Eeformation, in the stricter sense of the term, and 
whose religious and ecclesiastical value was for a long time 
over - estimated — we refer to Francis Bonivard, prior of 
St. Victor's. Far too much honour is done him by those 

1 This was at first the general title of the young men of Geneva who were 
capable of bearing arms ; it soon, however, became a party name. 
^ See Kampschulte, I.e. j). 56. 


who call him the Erasmus of Geneva. It is true, he was a 
man of acuteness and wit, but he possessed no moral depth 
or earnestness of character ; a Schoolman and satirist, he was 
led by caprice rather than principle. His imprisonment for 
several years (1530-36) in the castle of Chillon, at the 
east extremity of the Lake of Geneva, has been much lauded 
as that of a martyr for political and religious liberty, and 
has been celebrated in verse by poets such as Byron. Boni- 
vard's occasional attacks upon Eome and the abuses of the 
Church proceeded altogether, however, from another than the 
evangelical spirit of reform ; so that, from the standpoint of a 
history of the Eeformation, we can accord him but a passing 
notice, and have now to turn again to those men whom we 
may truly regard as the Eeformers of Geneva.^ Among these 
we must first mention Farel. Our previous designation of 
him as in a special sense the Reformer of Neuchatel, need 
not prevent us from applying the same term to him with 
reference to Geneva. He prepared the way for the man who 
was in the fullest sense the Reformer of that city. 

Farel repaired to Geneva in October 1533,' in company 
with his friend Antony Saunier, with whom he had previously 
visited the Waldensian valleys of Piedmont.^ 

^ In regard to Bonivard, we refer the reader to Galiffe's article (from im- 
printed manuscripts) in Herzog's Realvnc. xix. pp. 240 sqq. Bonivard's Advis 
et d6vi8 d Vital eccUsiastique et d ses mtdations certainly contains some strong 
passages adverse to Rome. But the frivolous and superficial estimate which 
the prisoner of Chillon entertained concerning the German Eeformation is 
instanced by Merle D'Aubigne as follows: — "Leo x. and his predecessors 
always regarded the Germans as pecora campi, and they were right in so think- 
ing of them, for they in their simplicity suffered themselves to be ridden and 
bridled like asses. The popes threatened them with cudgels (excommunication), 
soothed them with thistles (indulgences), and made them trot to mill to 
fetch them meal. One day, however, when Leo had imposed too heavy a load 
upon his donkey, the beast let fly his heels to such effect that the flour was 
spilled and the bread lost. This donkey, like all donkeys, was called Martin, 
and his surname was Luther, which means enlightener." 

^ Farel's sojourn in Geneva is thus described by the nun Jeanne de Jussieu : 
— "In the following month of October there came to Geneva a sorry wretch 
of a prea(;her named Master William, a native of Gap in Dauphiny. The 
day after his arrival, he commenced preaching privately at his lodgings, in 
presence of a great number of people, who had been informed of his coming 
and were already infected with his heresy." 


He held meetings in a private house. Soon he was 
summoned before the council. The charge of inciting the 
people to revolution he calmly denied, stating that he preached 
nothing but divine truth, for which he was ready to die. He 
likewise referred to the testimonials of their excellencies of 
Bern, which he carried with him. This put a new aspect 
upon the matter. The councillors dismissed Farel and his 
companion in the most friendly manner, though they did not 
omit to caution them against disturbing the public tranquillity. 
They had scarcely returned from the council hall, however, 
when they were cited to appear before the episcopal grand- 
vicar, Amad^e de Guigins, abbot of Bonmont. They were 
escorted by a deputation sent to them by the canons. On 
their way to the grand-vicar the populace reviled them, and 
women especially distinguished themselves in hurling oppro- 
brious epithets at them.^ From the priests they received a 
very unpriest-like greeting : " Come hither," cried they, " you 
abominable devil of a Farel ! What business have you to be 
going about and turning things topsy-turvy ? Who told you 
to come to this city ? Under whose authority do you preach ? " 
They demanded that he should prove his commission by 
working miracles, as Moses had done. Farel replied : " I am 
not a devil ; I preach Jesus Christ, the crucified, who died for 
our sins and rose again for our justification. ... I have 
come to this city to see whether there are not some here who 
wiU listen to me quietly, and I am ready to confirm what I 
say by my death. I derive my authority from none other than 
God. I am no disturber of the peace, and therefore I can 
give you no other answer than that which Elijah gave to 
Ahab : ' It is not / that trouble Israel ; it is thou. Ye 
have troubled the whole world with your traditions and human 
ordinances.' " 

" He has blasphemed God ! " exclaimed one of the most 
distinguished men in the assembly, rising from his seat ; 
" what need have we of further testimony ? He is worthy of 

^ Ces soiit ties caignes (chiens) qui passent, tlie people cried out. 


death. Into the Ehone with him ! into the Rhone ! He must 
die. It is better that this abominable Lutheran should die than 
that he should trouble the people." Farel answered, " Speak 
the words of God, and not those of Caiaphas." But louder 
grew the cry, " Kill him, kill this Lutheran, this dog ! " Finally 
they dismissed him. As he was leaving the hall a bullet was 
fired at him, but the gun from which it was discharged burst 
in the hands of his assailant. Some one else rushed at him 
with a naked sword. One of the syndics in attendance at last 
succeeded in rescuing him from the hands of the raging mob. 
Even as he was returning to his lodgings, he was followed by 
the cry, " Into the Ehone with him ! " The next morning his 
friends put him on board a boat which landed him between 
Merges and Lausanne. Thence Farel proceeded to Orbe and 
Grandson, where he greeted his brethren in the faith. In the 
neighbourhood of Grandson he met with a young man from 
the south of France, who was at that time pastor of Yvonand, 
a village on the southern shore of the Lake of Neuchatel. 
This person, whose name was Antoiny Froment, he endeavoured 
to secure as a preacher for Geneva. After some little hesita- 
tion, Froment resolved to repair to the city in question, 
relying on God. On the 3d of November he arrived at his 
destination, where he was an utter stranger. There being no 
one to whom he could apply for countenance, on his own 
responsibility he opened a school for the instruction of children 
in reading and writing. What the little ones heard in school 
about divine things they related at their homes. In con- 
sequence thereof, the fathers and mothers themselves repaired 
to the school, and school hours were turned into Bible hours. 
The number of Froment's hearers increased from day to day. 
The schoolroom in the inn " of the Golden Cross " was no 
longer large enough to accommodate them, nor did the porch 
suffice for the reception of the excess. " To the Molard ! " 
(the public square) was the cry that went up from the crowd 
that waited without the house. Froment was hurried away 
by the people, who meanwhile besought him to preach the 


word of God to them. Mounted on a fish bench, he discoursed 
on the text, " Beware of false prophets," etc. The council 
sent a messenger to him commanding him to descend from his 
improvised platform. Froment, however, was ready with the 
answer, " We ought to obey God rather than man." Then 
turning again to the people, he said, " Do not be disturbed, my 
friends, but listen to the description which Christ our Lord 
gives of false prophets." He then portrayed the priesthood 
to the life, sketching its characteristics with vigorous touches 
and occasionally, it must be confessed, some exaggeration. 
How could the attacked party endure such an assault ? The 
priests armed themselves and rushed upon him, with the 
governor at their head. To avoid bloodshed, Froment was 
finally persuaded to descend. He soon afterwards left the 
city. This scene was followed by an edict of the Govern- 
ment forbidding all public preaching, on pain of being whipped 
out of the city. 

In the meantime the efforts of Froment had resulted in 
the gathering of a little band of believers, who resolved to 
continue their meetings for the study of God's word even in the 
absence of a preacher. They assembled by night in a private 
house, and celebrated the Lord's Supper in a garden. A 
capmaker (or, according to others, a stocking-weaver), named 
Guerin Muete, was the leader of the conventicle. He too, 
however, was obliged to leave the city. 

In connection with Farel and Froment, we must mention 
the name of Peter Ptobert Olivetanus, a native of Nojou, in 
Picardy. He was a kinsman of Calvin. He also spent some 
time at Geneva as tutor in a wealthy family. His special 
share in the Eeformation of Eomanic Switzerland, and Geneva 
in particular, was as a translator of the Bible. 

The lords of Bern regarded Farel's expulsion from Geneva 
as an insult to themselves, for they had recommended the 
man. They upbraided the Genevans for their conduct in 
the matter, and charged them no longer to hinder the free 
proclamation of the gospel. On the reading of the Bernese 


epistle, a tumult arose in the council. The priests meantime 
had assembled at St. Peter's. Two hundred of their adherents 
marched into the council hall and entered a complaint against 
the people who liad come to introduce a new religion. Whilst 
the council (three days afterwards) were deliberating upon the 
answer that should be despatched to Bern, there arose a tumult 
in the streets that excited the gravest apprehensions. Armed 
adherents of the priests' party drew up before the house in 
which the Protestants held their meetings. This house, which 
was in the Eue basse des AUemands, was the residence of a 
man named Baudichon.^ The populace pressed towards the 
Molard. Peter Vandel, on lifting up his voice in favour of 
peace, received a wound from a dagger. All the citizens flew 
to arms. The bells sounded an alarm. The priests marched 
in procession through the streets with crucifix and banners, 
singing as they went the Vcxilla ixgis prodcunt. The people — 
men, women, and children — followed the priestly train, crying, 
" Down with the Lutherans ! " The latter, whose number 
amounted to about sixty, though wholly unprotected, were 
resolved not to swerve a hair's-breadth from their convictions ; 
they comforted themselves in this emergency with the words 
of the apostle, " If God be for us, who can be against us ? " 
Through the mediation of some Freiburgers, who pressed in 
between the combatants, the storm was checked for a brief 
period ; it, however, burst forth again witli fresh fury. In 
another street battle a canon named Peter Vernli (Vehrly), 
a native of Freiburg, in trying to clear a passage for himself 
and his attendants, was mortally wounded and sank lifeless to 
the ground. By the priestly party his death was regarded in 
the light of a martyrdom. The canon was buried with great 
pomp. The fact that the corpse of the dead man retained a 
fresh and ruddy appearance till the fifth day after his decease 

' The moral cliaracter of this man was certainly not above reproach. See 
Kampsciiulte, p. 76. He was undoubtedly an eccentric individual ; but 
whether he made a purely revolutionary use of the religious ideas of the 
Reformation, as Kampschulte (p. 98) accuses him of having done, may be left 
for others to decide. 


was looked upon as a miracle ; and it is further stated that an 
agreeable odour, such as has been observed to attend only upon 
saints, was diffused about the body. Bloody vengeance was 
sworn against the man who slew this saint. Commissioners 
from Freiburg made their appearance at Geneva and demanded 
satisfaction for the canon's death. A poor carman accordingly, 
after having been intoxicated by the priestly party, was 
stretched upon the rack, and a confession having thus been 
extorted from him, he was executed. 

Bern also interposed. An edict was finally issued providing 
that every person should be at liberty to make choice either 
of the mass or of the preaching of the gospel. On the 5th of 
July 1533, the bishop left the city. Froment returned to 
Geneva in company with a certain man named Dumoulin. 
The priestly party, however, now put forth their champion 
also. To stop the mouths of the " chimney-corner preachers," 
a famous doctor of the Sorbonne, Guy Furbity by name, was 
appointed to preach at Geneva during the season of Advent. 
He was escorted to St. Peter's Cathedral by a guard of 
soldiers. With a great deal of self-confidence he challenged 
his antagonists from the pulpit. " Where," he demanded, " are 
these fine preachers ? Why do they show themselves only in^ 
places where they can impose upon ignorant persons and 
feeble women ? " At this Froment stepped forth. Waving 
his hand, he requested that he might be allowed to speak. A 
solemn silence ensued. The eyes of all were fastened upon 
Froment, who then testified concerning that faith which is 
already familiar to us. The doctor of the Sorbonne was dumb. 
In vain the multitude importuned him to reply. The priests 
again had recourse to the sword, and once more resounded the 
cry, " Away with him into the Ehone I " As Froment left 
the church, the furious company of priests, with their adherents, 
followed him. Baudichou was obliged to defend him with 
the drawn sword against ill-usage. Dumoulin, on attempting 
to speak to the multitude, was arrested and conducted before 
the council. Sentence of death was nearly pronounced upon 


him as a distm-ber of the peace, but the council finally con- 
tented themselves with decreeing his banishment from the 
city. A great multitude accompanied him beyond the gate of 
St. Gervais. When tlie precincts of the city had been passed, 
a halt was made, and Dumoulin preached to the people for 
two hours. From Geneva he went to Lyons, where he suffered 
the martyrdom which he had escaped in the former city. 

Froment and Baudichon proceeded to Bern and related all 
that had befallen them. The lords of Bern took a very serious 
view of the matter. They provided Baudichon, who was 
joined by Farel, with letters to the Council of Geneva. The 
Bernese demanded that free course should be allowed to the 
gospel. Not so the authorities of Freiburg, who were pre- 
pared to renounce their alliance with Bern and Geneva if tlie 
latter complied with the requisitions of Bern. After a number 
of disturbances which we are unable to examine into, it was 
at last resolved to submit the controverted question to a public 
disputation, the issue of which should finally decide the 
ecclesiastical destinies of the republic. 

This disputation was held on the 29th of January 1534. 
The authority of the Church and the Scriptures, and the 
practice of fasting, formed the subjects of debate. When 
Furbity appealed to the authority of Saint Thomas Aquinas 
in justification of fasting, the lords of Bern objected, being 
willing to receive no testimony save that of Holy Writ. 
Thus at the outset the Reformatory principle was recognised 
to be the true one, and Furbity was forced to withdraw from 
the field. He was ordered to make a public recantation of 
his doctrine from the pulpit. This was a hard requirement. 
A large crowd assembled in the cathedral to witness the 
recantation, but the poor man could not bring himself to 
comply with the harsh command. Something he stammered, 
indistinctly enough, and the impatient people dragged him 
from tlie pulpit.^ The Bernese who were present found it 

1 The wliolc of the proceedings against Furbity are set forth in a light more 
favourahle to hiiu by IvAMl'SCllULTE, pp. 141 sqij. 


necessary to protect him from the violence of an excited 
crowd, as they had previously defended the Eeformers. 
Furbity was imprisoned for a while, and the claims of justice 
seemed thus to be satisfied. The Bernese next demanded that 
a temple should be consecrated to the worship of the Eeformed. 
The Government of Geneva delaying to accede to this requi- 
sition, a number of those who held the Eeformed faith called 
upon Farel on the 1st of March 1534, and escorted him to 
the hall of the Franciscan cloister of Eive, where he delivered 
a sermon. From that time this cloister church remained in 
the possession of the Eeformed, Farel preached there daily 
during the Lenten season. He wore no robes, but preached 
in ordinary citizen's dress, such as was customary at that 
time. This was the general practice of Eeformers in the 
Eeformed Church. 

The first disputation had not decided all disputed points, 
and a second one was found to be requisite. This lasted four 
entire weeks, from 30 th May to 24th June. In June of the 
same year [1534], Farel and Viret began to celebrate the 
Lord's Supper according to the rites of the Eeformed Church, 
acting as usual under the protection of Bern. Freiburg, 
indignant at the introduction of so many innovations, had 
already, in pursuance of its threat, withdrawn from its alliance 
with Geneva. In July the banished bishop, assisted by the 
CathoKc cantons of the Confederacy, which he extolled as 
the " defenders of his poor Church," and aided especially by 
Freiburg, made an unsuccessful attempt to surprise the city of 
Geneva and capture it by force of arms. Upon the failure of 
this plan, Geneva fully and formally renounced allegiance to 
the bishop, who by his undertaking had acted the part of 
a rebel against the civil authority. Thenceforth but little 
resistance was offered by the adherents of the old order of 
things. As Farel was going one day, as usual, to the Fran- 
ciscan cloister of Eive, for the purpose of preaching, his friends 
conducted him in triumph to the church of St. Madeleine, 
that God's word might there also be fearlessly proclaimed. 


It was the feast of the church's consecration, and the priest 
was about to read mass. He attempted to make his escape, 
hut was compelled to remain and hear Farel's sermon. Soon 
afterwards the Eeformed took possession of St. Gervais, and a 
few days later Farel preached in the principal church of the 
city, St. Peter's Cathedral, from which a tumultuous crowd, 
led on by the hot-blooded Baudichon, removed the images and 

On the 10th of August, Farel appeared before the Grand 
Council, and in an impressive discourse once more set before 
them the indefensibility of images and the mass. He con- 
cluded his address with a fervent prayer that God would 
enlighten the lords of the council, to the salvation of the 
entire people of Geneva. The council were still unwilling to 
do anything rashly, and were also desirous of hearing the 
adverse party. They accordingly invited the monks to appear 
before them on the 12th of AuQ-ust, and asked them what 
they had to say in favour of the mass. The monks, however, 
who were for the most part aged men, destitute of theological 
culture, found nothing to reply. They candidly confessed 
their lack of learning, and stated that they had followed the 
ordinances of their fathers without personal investigation. 
They further begged that they might be permitted to continue 
unmolested in the practice of their religious exercises. The 
secular clergy, to whom the same question was proposed as to 
the monks, more defiantly expressed their purpose to abide by 
the Catholic faith. The council, very naturally, would not 
accede to this determination. Finally, on the 2 7th of August 
1535, an edict was published, abolishing the Eomish rites and 
legalizing the preaching of the gospel at Geneva. Those of 
the clergy who adhered to the ancient faith, and also the 
monks and nuns, quitted the city,^ 

The Duke of Savoy now tried the effect of clemency, with 
the hope of reingratiating himself witli the Genevans. He 

^ On the dignified behaviour of the Sisters of St. Clara on this occasion, see 
Kajii'schulte, I.e. p. 173. 


offered the city peace and free passage through his domains 
on condition of renouncing heresy. But the Genevans replied 
that the gospel was dearer to them than all temporal prosperity, 
and they would rather surrender their city to the flames than 
be deprived of that pearl of great price.^ 

In comparing the passionate struggles of French-speaking 
Switzerland with the progress of the Eeformation among the 
German population of the Confederacy — a progress pro- 
portionally quiet in the main, or at least interrupted only by 
passing storms ; and, again, in contrasting the ofttimes violent 
method of Farel with the prudent yet persevering course of 
Zwingle and (Ecolampadius, it is necessary always to take 
into consideration the difference between the Germanic and 
the Eomanic blood, as well as the diversity of personal 
character. In the end, however, it will be manifest, here as 
elsewhere, that howsoever man may sin, God's ways are 
always equal, and in the case either of nations or individuals, 
surely lead on to the goal which eternal Wisdom has deter- 
mined. Wliat Geneva became in consequence of the Eefor- 
mation, we shall see in connection with the history of that 
man whose name is, more closely than any other, bound up 
with the history of the city. For the present we must 
return to the German Eeformation, the course of which we 
have anticipated by about two years. 

^ In 1523 Luther based the most ardent hopes on this Duke Charles of Savoy 
as a friend and supporter of the gospel. See his letter of 7th September, given 
in German by De Wette, ii. No. 528, in Latin, vi. No. 2354. 







WE shall now return to the general history of the 
Eeformation, devoting our attention, in the first 
place, once more to Germany. At the beginning of the year 
1533, the emperor, while in Italy, had held a conference with 
the pope at Bologna. It was then resolved that measures 
should be taken to realize the longr-talked-of council. Ac- 
cordingly, the imperial ' envoy, Lampert de Briarde, and the 
Papal legate, Hugo Eango, bishop of Eeggio, repaired to 
Germany for the purpose of notifying the German princes 
that the pope intended to convene a general assembly of the 
Church after the ancient fashion. Where this assembly was 
to meet was not yet decided, Mantua, Bologna, and Piacenza 
all being spoken of as probable localities. The Protestants 
were invited to attend this council, and were further requested 
to suspend all innovations in religious matters until the 
council should have taken place. The new Elector of Saxony, 
John Frederick the Magnanimous, received the joint embassy 
of the emperor and the pope at Weimar, having previously 
obtained the written opinion of his theologians concerning 
the subject to be discussed.^ That opinion was by no means 

^ Four opinions jointly drawn up by Luther, Melanohthon, Bugenhagen, 
and Jonas, De Wette, iv. No. 1523. 


favourable to the Papal proposal. If the pope had been 
about to convoke a council in accordance with the word of 
God, the Protestants would have been in duty bound to 
attend that council ; but a council " after the ancient fashion " 
could by no possibility be a true and free council. " The 
very first article," the theologians declared, is " knavishly and 
treacherously worded ; it shuns the light and mutters in the 
dark, like a haK angel, half devil." Nor, it was further 
represented, did the questions to be discussed relate " simply 
to controversies in Germany," as the pope pretended ; the 
cause was one that concerned all Christendom, seeing that it 
had to do with the word of God, Still the theologians 
thought it not advisable that an opposition council should be 
held, and recommended that the matter should be conducted 
with all the gentleness possible without a denial of the truth. 
The elector's reply embodied the opinion of his theologians, 
with a more courteous wording, of course. But before the 
council could take place, events occurred that gave rise to 
fresh embarrassments. Among these occurrences was the 
military expedition undertaken by Philip of Hesse in behalf 
of his kinsman Duke Ulrich of Wurtemberg. The latter had, 
in the year 1519, been driven from his dominions by the 
Swabian Alliance, for taking the city of EeutKngen by sur- 
prise ; and in 1 5 3 1 his dukedom was sold to the emperor, 
who had bestowed it upon his brother Ferdinand. After the 
dissolution of the alliance (in 1533), and during the absence 
of the emperor in Spain, the landgrave availed himself of the 
favourable opportunity thus offered to assist his friend to 
regain his old possessions. The Elector of Saxony vainly 
endeavoured to dissuade Philip from so perilous an enterprise. 
The landgrave went rapidly to work, as was his custom. 
Obtaining money from Francis i., king of France, he 
assembled an army and defeated the troops of Ferdinand 
near Laufen on the Neckar, about a mile from Heilbronn. 
The duke was reinstated, and "Wurtemberg once more 
became Wurtembergish," as Eanke says.-^ On the 14th of 

^ Deutsche Geschichte, iii. p. 462. 


May 1534, the victors entered Stuttgart, and three days 
afterwards the victory was celebrated by the preaching of two 
evangelical sermons. In June, Philip concluded a peace with 
King Ferdinand at Cadan in Bohemia, not forgetting the interests 
of the Eeformation. The religious peace of Nuremberg was 
ratified on this occasion. Ferdinand was obliged to promise 
to forbid the imperial chamber to prosecute complaints against 
the Protestants. The members of the league of Schmalkald 
now, for the first time, manifested a willingness to recognise 
Ferdinand as Eoman king. Luther congratulated himself on 
the unlooked-for victory, and expressed his hope that God 
would finish what He had begun.^ 

By the treaty of peace, Duke Ulricli was forbidden to 
compel any person in his territories to embrace the doctrines 
of the Reformation ; he was, however, at liberty legally to 
establish the reform where it had already taken root. He 
went to work, accordingly, without delay. The task which 
first presented itself to him was a work of union. Both 
doctrines concerning the Lord's Supper had obtained adherents 
in the dukedom. In one part of the country [oh dcr Steig] 
the Swiss doctrine prevailed, while the remaining part [unter 
der Steigl had adopted the Lutheran view. Ulrich himself 
had long been in correspondence with the Swiss Eeformers, 
and also with Bucer and Capito of Strassburg. By the latter, 
Simon Grynajus of Basel and Ambrose Blarer of Constance 
were recommended to him as men who might aid him in 
establishing the Eeformation.^ The friends of Lutheranism 
directed the attention of the duke to Brenz at Schwabisch- 
Hall. Had the duke's re-establishment occurred prior to the 
defeat of the Swiss at Cappel, their doctrine might readily 

' Letter to Justus Menius, De Wette, iv. No. 1596. 

2 It was said of Blarer : " He is tnily such a learned, afTable, kind, brave, 
and discreet man, his whole behaviour is so honest, pious, and gracious ; and 
furthermore, God has endowed him with such a special gift for ordering 
churches in accordance with true Christianity, that we are sure if your princely 
grace should yourself listen to his conversation and have any dealings with 
him, you would confess that all we have said of him is true." See Puessel, 
I.e. p. 97. 


have gained tlie upper hand, as Landgrave Philip was also on 
the side of the Swiss. At the present juncture, however, 
their prospects were less favourable. The articles of peace 
subscribed at Cadan were, moreover, hostile to the Sacramen- 
tarians, so that even Landgrave Philip concurred with Duke 
Ulrich in the determination of the latter to confer ecclesi- 
astical appointments upon such men only as maintained the 
doctrine of the true presence of Christ's true body and blood 
in the sacramental bread and wine. The duke, nevertheless, 
was not averse to an effort to secure an understanding 
between the two parties. In the castle at Stuttgart, accord- 
ingly, a religious discussion took place between Blarer, Mdio 
established himself at Tubingen, and Erhard Schnepff, then 
professor at Marburg, but a native of Heilbronn in Swabia. 
The discussion was at first rather wearisome, as Schnepff 
evinced much obstinacy.^ The disputants, however, finally 
agreed upon a formula which set forth the presence of Christ's 
body and blood as real and veritable, but at the same time 
excluded the conception of that presence as material and local. 
This conclusion, which heartily delighted the duke, was 
reached on the 2d of August 1534. Ulrich requested of the 
disputants that neither should boast that the other had 
recanted, but that each should say that they had come to an 
agreement. Notwithstanding this precaution, however, the 
" Concord of Stuttgart " was followed by many a controversy 
of tongue and pen, further notice of which we omit.^ The 
grand result was, that the Eeformation at length made pro- 
gress. Blarer directed its course in one part of the dukedom 
[oh dcr Steig\ while Schnepff was entrusted with the 
conduct thereof in another portion of the province \_unteT 
dcr Steig]. In the following year (1535), Brenz was called 
to Stuttgart, in order that he might establish the Pieformation 

'The landgrave admonislied him to proceed gently and not to "wrangle 
about words," and Melanchthon also recommended meekness to his friend 
{Corp. Ref. ii. p. 786) ; Hartmann, E. Schnepff', Tubingen, 1870, p. 37. 

- For particulars, see Peessel, I.e. 



there in accordance with the Lutheran doctrine.^ lie revised 
the ecclesiastical constitution already planned by Schnepff, 
to which were added an order of visitation and regulations 
coDcerning matrimony.^ 

The Pieforniation of Wurtemberg favourably affected the 
cause of Eeforni throughout Southern Germany. The Svvabian 
Alliance had done its utmost for the repression of evangelical 
sentiments ; but after the dissolution of that union, peopl'e 
began to breathe more freely. After the death of Margrave 
Philip of Baden (1535), Protestantism was, under the rule of 
Margrave Ernest, largely embraced in the northern portion of 
the margraviate ; while the southern part, under the influence 
of Catholic tutelage, clung to Catholicism. 

It was a fact of no slight importance that the city of 
Augsburg embraced the doctrines of the Eeformation. On 
the 2 2d of July 1534, the great and little council of that 
city resolved that no Papist preachers should be allowed, or 
the mass be longer tolerated, in any churches save those that 
pertained immediately to the bishop. In consequence of this 
edict, most of the chapels were closed. A portion of the 
clergy left the city, while the rest gathered more closely 
around the bishop and chapter.^ The latter made good their 
stand against the Protestants, so that from that time both the 
Catholic and the Evangelical form of worship subsisted side by 
side in the city. A similar condition of things prevailed in 
Prankfort-on-the-Main. "We have already seen that the 
preaching of Hartmann Ibach was very favourably received 
in that city as early as the year 1522, and from that time 
forth. The opposite party, however, continued to have its 
adherents. The parish church was divided between the 
Catholics and the Protestants. Hateful polemical discourses 

* The Lord's Siqipor was for tlic first time adnnnistereil in botli kinds at 
Stuttgart during Lent. 

" See ILvKTMANN UND Jagei!, vol. ii. ; Hartmann, Joh. Brenz, pp. 15 sqq. ; 
Eanke, I.e. ; Gul'NEiSEN, Denkhlutt dcr Beformatlon der Stadt Stuttgart, 

3 Kaxkk, iii. p. 487. 


were delivered from the pulpits. On the Protestant side, 
Dionysius Melander distinguished himself by his immoderate 
zeal. Iconoclasm was resorted to in 1533. The council, 
importuned for a decision by the guilds, was at length com- 
pelled to take energetic measures. The Catholic foundations 
of the city (St. Bartholomew's, Our Lady's, and St. Leonard's) 
were commanded to discontinue the rites of the Catholic 
Church, The burghers were forbidden to attend mass at the 
neighbouring towns and villages, and a father who had had 
his child baptized outside the city was fined. The intro- 
duction of a complete order for the evangelical celebration 
of divine worship perfected the reform ; but in November 
1535 the council found it necessary to sanction the revival 
of the Catholic ritual of worship, and its continuance together 
with the Protestant form.^ 

The Eeformation made progress in Northern Germany also 
at about this time. George and Parnim, the two princes of 
Pomerania, held different views on the subject of religion. 
Parnim declared that when his brother said " Up ! " he would 
say "Down!"^ The two thus counterbalanced each other. 
George dying, however, and his son Philip being more 
accessible to the Evangelical doctrine than his father had been, 
a union of the two parties was brought about at Cammin, 
in August 1534. A plan of reformation was drawn up 
at the Diet of Treptow and was favourably received. Dr. 
Pommer (Bugenhagen) was invited to perform an ecclesi- 
astical visitation. 

A desire for ecclesiastical reform had long been manifested 
in "Westphalia, but there was also no lack of opposing forces. 
In the cities of Soest and Paderborn some shocking scenes 
were enacted.^ It was only upon compulsion that the 
burgomaster and council of Soest had given their consent to 
the preaching of Lutheran doctrines, and they harboured 
intentions of vengeance against the leaders of the reformatory 

^ See Steitz, in Herzog's Bealenc. iv. pp. 457 sqq. 
^ Eanke, I.e. ^ Rankk, I.e. pp. 492 sqq. 


movement. They found an opportunity to vent this secret 
resentment upon a simple burgher named Schlachtorp, a tanner 
by occupation. Tliis man had, when heated by wine, railed 
at the magistracy, and for this offence he was condemned to 
die as an opposer of law and justice and inciter to sedition. 
Schlachtorp regarded himself, however, as a martyr in the 
cause of the Evangelical faith, for the sake of which he declared 
he had been condemned and was ready to die. He suffered 
himself to be led forth to death without resistance. At the 
place of execution he began to sing the hymn commencing, 
Mit Fried und Freud fahr ieh daliin (" I seek my heavenly home 
with joy"), and the multitude, whose hearts he had won, united 
their voices with his. With alacrity he offered his neck to 
the sword, but the blow of the executioner, instead of 
descending on the proper place, fell upon the back of the 
doomed man. Schlachtorp, severely wounded though he was, 
started up, and a struggle ensued between himself and his 
executioner, ending in the seizure of the sword by the half- 
murdered man. The people, who had witnessed this battle 
with horror, greeted its issue with acclamations of joy. 
Schlachtorp, bearing the sword thus won, was conducted in 
triumph to his house. There, indeed, he died, in consequence 
of loss of blood and excitement, but his funeral was attended 
with great pomp. The captured sword of justice was laid 
upon his coffin. The people's voice had decided. The old 
council was obliged to succumb ; a new one was introduced, 
and with it the 'Eeformation. These events took place in 
July 1533. 

Paderborn was the scene of similar occurrences, though of 
none with so bloody an issue as the foregoing. In tills city 
the cession of a few of the churches to Evangelical preachers 
had not been effected without a popular tumult, negotiation 
with tlie secular authorities having proved of no avail. On 
tlie occasion of the armed entry of the newly-appointed 
administrator of the foundation, Bishop and Elector Hermann 
of Cologne, who was at this time to receive the homage of the 


burghers, the latter, at the instigation of the council and the 
canons, were all assembled in the garden of a certain convent ; 
there they were suddenly surrounded by armed troops, and 
their leaders were arrested and consigned to prison. The 
imprisoned men, after being subjected to torture, had sentence 
of death pronounced upon them, which sentence was to be 
executed in the presence of the populace. They were "accord- 
ingly conducted to the place of execution, where a scaffold 
had been erected and strewn with sand to receive the blood 
of the condemned. At this juncture, however, the chief 
executioner declared that he could not overstep the bounds of 
his office, and that, as the men were innocent, he would rather 
die himself than take their lives. An aged man, who was 
among the spectators, also lifted up his voice, saying that he 
himself was as guilty as were the condemned, and demanding 
to be executed with them. Matrons and maidens now pressed 
forward and entreated that the prisoners might be pardoned. 
This scene brought tears to the eyes of the elector, who was 
no fanatic, — indeed, he had a secret leaning towards the 
Evangelicals,^ — and he gave the condemned their lives. This, 
however, was not equivalent to a victory for the Eeformation. 
The Evangelicals continued under strict supervision, and by an 
edict of the 18th of October 1532, the severest penalties 
were pronounced upon those who should embrace the new 

The old city of Miinster,^ the name of which recalls the 
days when the building of a house of God formed the nucleus 
around which a whole city gathered, was the seat of a bishop, 
with whom a cathedral chapter of forty members was associated. 
The individuals who composed this body, though for the most 
part men of learning, were addicted to the more refined 
pleasures of the world, and, encased in an armour of aristocratic 
pride, manifested no appreciation of the earnest movements of 

1 Hereafter we shall see him embrace the Reformation. On the occasion 
referred to above, he permitted a misuse of his name and authority. 

2 [Minster.] 


the time. Heform here pursued its usual course, stirring first 
the masses, and from them gradually working its way upward. 
A young chaplain of the foundation of St. Maurice, Bernard 
Kottmann (Eothmann) by name, a native of Hesse, began to 
preach the pure gospel here in 1531 (some say 1529), and 
found many adherents among the burghers. The foundation 
of St. Maurice was situated outside of the city, but the people, 
eager to hear the new doctrine, went in crowds to attend upon 
the discourses of the youthful preacher. At last they wished him 
to hold forth in the city, and St. Lambert's Church being closed 
to him, he preached in the churchyard from a block of wood. 
The concourse of people finally succeeded in bursting open the 
church doors, when they immediately proceeded to destroy the 
images. A disputation was at length resorted to, which 
resulted in the expulsion of the Eomish clergy, they having 
proved unable satisfactorily to defend their doctrines and 
practices. The bishop, by a voluntary resignation of his office, 
had opportunely evaded the reformatory movements. He was 
succeeded by the Bishop of Minden, Count Francis von 
Waldeck, who, however, found himself, in company with his 
chapter, compelled to leave the city. He was joined by the 
adherents of the old Church and also by some members of the 
council. The Episcopal party enlisted the aid of three hundred 
lanzknechts. The neighbouring village of Telgte, on the 
Ems, where the bishop had a country seat, became the 
rallying-place of the Catholics. Thence, on Christmas day 
1532, a proclamation was issued commanding the people of 
Miinster to dismiss their Evangelical preachers, and threatening 
punishment in case of non-compliance with this order. But 
the people were resolved upon resistance, and even anticipated 
the bishop's execution of his threats. An attack on Telgte 
was immediately decided upon and forthwith set on foot. 
Six hundred armed burghers, accompanied by three hundred 
mercenaries, fell upon the episcopal castle by night, and 
captured the canons, the princely councillors, and those mem- 
bers of the council of Miinster who had taken refuge with the 


bishop — all of whom they carried to the city in three waggons 
on St. Stephen's day. The bishop had fled previous to the 
attack. In February 1533, through the mediation of the 
Landgrave of Hesse, a peace was brought about, which provided 
that all the parish churches of the city should be given up 
to the Evangelicals. The cathedral alone, with its chapter, 
remained Catholic. 

A little before Christmas, on St. Thomas' day (21st December 
1532), Luther wrote to the council at Mlinster congratulating 
them on the victory of the gospel, but also (as if he had 
a presentiment of what was about to happen) admonishing 
the people of Mlinster not to suffer themselves to be led 
astray by the heresies of the Anabaptists or other sectarians. 
It is true that he counted Zwingle as one of these same 
heretics, placing him on a par with Miinzer, Hetzer, Hubmaier, 
and other kindred spirits.^ He praises Bernard Rottmann as 
a " fine preacher," but then, as though he had not entire 
confidence in him, goes on to say : " Nevertheless, it is needful 
to admonish and warn him and all other preachers to watch 
and pray diligently that they and their people may be 
preserved from such false teachers. The devil is a sly rogue 
and able to seduce fine, pious, and learned preachers ; we 
have, alas ! before our eyes the example of many who have 
fallen away from the pure word and have become followers 
of Zwingle, Miinzer, or the Anabaptists ; such have also 
become disturbers of the public peace, and once and again 
have laid hands on the reins of secular government, as was 
the case with Zwingle himself." 

Luther even addressed a similar letter to Eottmann.^ He 
had heard, he wrote, that Sacramentarians had crept into 
Westphalia, and he begged the' preacher to be on his guard 
against them, both for his own sake and for the sake of his 

As for Eottmann, he seemed at first determined to take a 
decided stand against the Anabaptists, who were undoubtedly 
1 De Wette, iv. No. 1496. - Ibid. No. 1497. 


active in those regions/ As early as September 1532 
(before lie received Luther's warning), he wrote thus to a 
friend : " I have already had much to do with the Anabaptists; 
for the time being, they have desisted from more active opera- 
tions, but threaten to return to the charge with renewed 
vigour. However, if God be for us, who can be against us ? " 
He was an avowed adherent of the Zwinglian view of the 
Lord's Supper, nor do his sentiments on this subject appear 
to have been changed by Luther's epistle. In a letter written 
about Whitsuntide 1533, he complains bitterly, " I cannot 
adequately describe how the Lutherans threaten us." Too 
soon, however, he showed himself a fanatic by rudely attempt- 
ing an ocular demonstration of Christ's non-presence in the 
bread of the Eucharist. He took a wafer and threw it on the 
ground, saying to the bystanders, " Look you, where is the 
flesh and blood in that ? If that were a God, He would pick 
Himself up and return to the altar." He next proceeded to 
celebrate the Lord's Supper in its primitive form. He 
crumbled bread into a dish, poured wine over it, and invited 
his companions at table to draw near and partake thereof, he 
having first spoken the words of institution. At the same 
time he developed into an Anabaptist. He called infant 
baptism an abomination in the sight of God, and refused to 
baptize infants. , The pulpit was now forbidden him. In 
common with the preachers who espoused his cause, he issued 
a Confession, in which he expressed his adherence to the 
Zwinglian doctrine concerning the Lord's Supper, and his 
rejection of infant baptism. Thus did he, like Luther, yet 
in a different sense, associate Zwingle and Miinzer. History 
owes him the statement, however, that from this time forth 

^ After being driven from Germany and Switzerland, they scattered in all 
directions. We meet with them in Salzburg and its vicinity under the name of 
the " Gardener Bretliren." There also they were persecuted. In the year 1527, 
they and their meeting-house were burned together. A young girl whom the 
peisecuting jiarty were unwilling to cast alive into the flames, was carried in the 
arms of the executioner to the horse-pond, plunged beneath the water, and 
drowned, her corpse being afterwards burned (Hase, Neue Propheten, p. 177). 
Some fled to the Netherlands and some gathered in Westphalia. 


he lived a life of strict self-denial, withdrew from all social 
pleasures, and earned the reputation of a rigid ascetic. 

The Anabaptists now made common cause with the 
preacher who had once so valiantly opposed them. The 
Council of Miinster were thus thrown into no little perplexity. 
At first they proposed closing all the churches in the city. 
Becoming convinced, however, of the inexpediency of this 
measure, they had a preacher sent them by the landgrave, 
one Fabricius by name. This man was expected to pre- 
side over the Evangelical Church party and silence the 
Anabaptists, against whom the churches continued to be 
closed. The last he did not succeed in accomplishing. 
Eottmann preached in private houses, and at times, in spite 
of the mandate, forced his way into a church. His adherents 
made themselves heard in the market-places and the church- 
yards, A journeyman smith who thus preached was 
imprisoned, but speedily restored to liberty upon the menaces 
of his guild - fellows. Converts who had not yet been re- 
baptized, among whom was Eottmann himself, were baptized 
afresh by deputies from the Netherlands. On the 14th of 
January 1534, two apostles of the sect made their appear- 
ance in Miinster. These were John Bockhold (Bockelsohn, 
Benkelszoon), a tailor of Leyden, and John Matthias 
(Matthiesen, Matthyszoon), a baker of Haarlem, the latter of 
whom declared himself to be Enoch. Under the influence 
of these demagogues, fanaticism reached a dangerous height. 
They found a confederate in Berendt KnipperdoUing, a cloth 
dealer : originally of Miinster, he had some time before been 
banished from the city, had made the acquaintance of the 
new prophets during his wanderings, and now cast in his 
lot with them, with the intention of establishing a new 
Jerusalem. These men usurped the civil authority. Knip- 
perdoUing became first burgomaster, and another fanatic 
obtained the position of second burgomaster. A reign of 
terror now ensued, in which the wildest fanaticism displayed 
at once its most appalling and most ludicrous forms. A 


community of goods was immediately proclaimed. All in 
Miinster who possessed silver, gold, jewels, or works of art, 
were commanded, on pain of death, to deliver them np at the 
City Hall. Pictures and musical instruments were ruthlessly 
destroyed. Every man was ordered to work for the com- 
munity, and common meals were instituted, as in Sparta, for 
the purpose of uniting all into one family. 

People of wealth who were able to leave the city at this 
time, took their departure, and those who did not voluntarily 
go were forcibly expelled. Anabaptism, though only in the 
limited area of a city government, succeeded in obtaining the 
prerogatives of an exclusive state religion, thereby presenting 
the most repulsive caricature of that theocratic ideal which 
hovered before the minds of the nobler natures of that aqc. 
Its rule was, fortunately, not of long duration. The prince- 
bishop besieged the apostate city. But in this very time 
of siege, fanaticism attained its acme. After the death of 
Matthiesen in a sally of the besieged, John of Leyden 
exercised unlimited authority as king. He was supported by 
twelve elders, in the character of the elders of the twelve 
tribes of Israel. Knipperdolling discharged the office of 
executioner. By his hand fell all who opposed the regula- 
tions of this new kingdom of God. A community of wives 
was forcibly established. The king himself had a harem con- 
taining sixteen women. In October 1534, the whole city 
celebrated a great love-feast, at whicli places for 4200 jiersons 
were made ready. Unleavened wheaten cakes were carried 
around in baskets and distributed amongst the guests, with 
the words : " Brother, sister, take this. As the grains of 
wheat are baked together, and as the grapes are pressed 
togetlier, so we are one." After this ceremony, the hymn 
Allcin Gott in dcr HoK sci Ehr' was sung. During the feast, 
the king, who walked up and down among the long tables, 
espied an interloper in tlie person of one of the German 
lanzknechts, who had been taken prisoner, and had been brought 
to the entertainment by his host. The king, declaring that this 


■unfortunate man " had not on a wedding garment/' himself 
struck off his head in the presence of the whole assembly. 

The authority of the king was considerably strengthened 
by the revelations of a new prophet, who arose in the 
beginning of September — we refer to John Dusentschuer, 
a goldsmith of Warendorf. He it was who, moved by a 
prophetic spirit, had proclaimed John of Leyden king of 
the new Jerusalem, declaring that he " should occupy the 
throne of David until the Father should claim the kingdom 
from him." 

Without pursuing the subject further in its intermediate 
details, let us turn our attention to the tragical issue of this 
affair. The Prince-Bishop of Waldeck became convinced that 
it would be impossible for him alone to conquer the rebellious 
city. !N"or did the help of his allies — the Archbishop of 
Cologne and the Dukes of Jiilich and Cleves, to whom he 
was referred — suffice for the purpose. Further aid was 
necessary. In the middle of December 1534, a Westphalian 
Dietine was convened at Coblentz, at which the Elector of 
Saxony was present. The members of this assembly feeling 
still unable to cope with the defenders of Mlinster, King 
Ferdinand was requested to convoke an imperial Diet at 
Worms. The Diet assembled, and made a grant of one 
hundred thousand florins to assist in defraying the expenses 
of the war. It was, however, a Protestant prince who 
turned the scale in favour of the besiegers. This prince 
was the Landgrave Philip, who, by the peace of Cadan, stood 
pledged to Ferdinand to lend his aid in besieging Mlinster. 
This promise he was able conscientiously to make and to 
fulfil, as the success of the beleaguerers involved the sub- 
jugation not of brethren of the Evangelical faith, but of 
a fanatical sect, whose victory might be as dangerous to 
Protestantism as to Catholicism. So, in April 1535, the 
landgrave sent a portion of his troops, on their return from 
Wurtemberg, to join those of the emperor and the bishop. The 
new Jerusalem was surrounded on every side, and all supplies 


were cut off. Famine speedily set in, with all its horrors, as 
in the times of the beleaguerment of the Holy City under 
Titus. The flesh not only of horses, but also of dogs, cats, 
and rats, was eaten, and leather was chewed, strips being 
torn even from the bindings of Bibles to satisfy in some 
little measure the cravings of hunger. It was no wonder 
that the faith of the besieged began to fail. But woe to 
those who ventured upon any expression of their unbelief! 
When (in the beginning of the famine) one of the king's 
wives uttered a doubt as to whether it could be the will of 
God that the people should die of hunger, while the king 
revelled in luxury, the king seized her, dragged her to the 
market-place in the midst of the assembled people, caused 
her to kneel, and with his own hand struck off her head ; 
then, spurning the headless trunk with his foot, he forced 
the rest of his wives to sing, " Glory be to God on high." It 
was scoffingly proposed to those who were so weak from 
hunger as to be unable to stand, that they should dance 
with the king ; for sorrow, declared their persecutors, should 
be mingled with joy. Finally, on the 24th of June 1535, 
the city, through treachery, fell into the hands of its besiegers. 
Two burghers of Miinster conducted several hundred lanz- 
knechts by night over the ditches and ramparts into the 
city, overcame the guards, opened the city gate, and pressed 
forward to the cathedral. The dismayed inhabitants, starting 
from their beds, flocked together to oppose the invaders. 
The conflict was continued witliin the city, thousands falling 
on both sides. It was not until the fourth day after the 
capture of Miinster that the prince-bishop celel^rated his 
triumphal entry. Eottmann met with an opportune death in 
the heat of the struggle,^ but John of Lcyden and his coun- 
cillors and attendants were taken prisoners and placed in irons. 
The city was given up to plunder. A number of executions 
took place, the unfortunate victims being hanged in rows. 

^ As Lis body was not fouml, it was afterwards rcqioi'tcd tliat he had escaped, 
and that he ended his days at a nobleman's castle in Friesland. 


KnipperdoUing's wife, on refusing to abjure her faith, was 
beheaded on the 7th of July. No such easy death was 
accorded to her husband. He, in company with John of 
Leyden and John Krechting, former counsellor of the king, 
was reserved for the choicest tortures. The landgrave had 
vainly endeavoured, through the medium of his theologians — 
Anthony Corvinus and John Kymeus — to bring these men to 
an acknowledgment of their error and to repentance for their 
sin. They were condemned to the painful punishment of 
being dragged about for a year from one place to another, amid 
the laughter and derision of the populace. Finally, they were 
brought back to Mlinster, there to die a horrible death on the 
spot where their atrocious deeds had been committed. One 
after another, for the space of an hour, in the open market- 
place, they were tortured, by having their flesh torn off with 
red-hot pincers, until they either expired in consequence of 
their sufferings or were strangled by the executioner. Their 
bodies were then placed upright in iron cages, and fastened 
to the tower of the church of St. Lambert, "for a warning and 
terror to all unruly spirits." 

And how fared the city itself ? Not only did it lose its 
civil liberties, but also its evangelical freedom. Catholic 
worship was restored in all the churches, and the monks and 
nuns who had formerly been driven from the cloisters took 
possession of them once more. It is a remarkable fact that 
the bishop, by whose authority these changes were effected, was 
by no means one of the persecuting hierarchs of the Church ; 
he was even, like Bishop Hermann of Cologne, inclined to 
favour Evangelical principles. In all ages, however, it has 
been seen that a horror of degenerate liberty or licence not 
infrequently brings true liberty itself into disrepute even with 
tlie noblest minds. As Dr. Hase says, " Protestantism, by its 
inconsiderate acts, had lost all right and power in those parts." 
The Evangelicals no longer dared open their mouths. The fall 
of Mlinster was followed, moreover, by persecutions of the 
Anabaptists, and, with them, of Protestantism, in various other 


places.^ Lutlier remarked that " God had chased out the 
devil, but the devil's grandmother had come in." ^ 

• Luther writes as follows to the Elector John Frederick (May 1536) : — "The 
priests cannot rest, and are fortified by the wretched fall of Miinster in their 
determination to exterminate Protestantism in every place. May God defeat 
their purpose. Amen" (De Wette, iv. No. 1713). 

- Hask, Neue Propheten (Das Belch der W'mlertaufer), p. 261. Besides this 
work, in which may also be found, pp. 352 sqq., a list and critique of sources, 
comp. DoRPius, Die Wiedertdufer in Miinster, zur Geschichte des Communismus 
iin 16 Jahrhundert neu herausge(jehen von Menchmann, with an introduction by 
Gelzer, Magdeburg, 1847 ; Jochmus, Geschichte der Kirchcnreformation in 
Miinster und ihres Unterganges durch die Wiedertdufer, Miinster, 1826 ; Hast, 
Geschichte der Wiedertanfer in Miinster, Miinster, 1836 ; Eanke, I.e. iii. ; 
Klippel, in Herzog's Realenc. x. pp. 93 sqq. ; C. A. Cornelius, Die nieder- 
liindischen Wiedertanfer ivahrend der Belagerung Miinsters, 1534-1535, ^Miinster, 
1869, iv. 








IN the midst of the disorders which occupied our attention 
in the Last chapter, and before the occurrence of the 
promised council. Pope Clement vii. died on the 25th of 
September 1534. He was succeeded in October by Paul iiL, 
of the house of the Parnese. This man, who, at the time of 
his elevation to the pontificate, was sixty-six years of age, was 
the possessor of much worldly wisdom. He zealously advocated 
the proposed council, and declared that he would not rest until 
he had brought it to pass. He also seemed inclined to favour 
the views of the Protestants to as great an extent as could be 
expected from a pope. Paul Vergerio, the legate whom he 
employed, was an exceedingly clever, enlightened, and liberal 
man, and himself became subsequently a convert to Protes- 
tantism.-^ In November 1535, Vergerio, after making some 
stay in Vienna and Berlin, arrived in Saxony, accompanied 
by a numerous retinue. At Wittenberg he had an interview 
with Luther, who frankly expressed to him his sentiments in 
regard to the council. The elector was absent at this time, 
on a journey to King Ferdinand. Vergerio followed him and 

1 SiXT, Ch. H., Petrus Paulus Vergerius, j'apstUcher Nuncius, katkolischer 
Bischqf itnd Vorkdmpfer des EvangeUums, Braunschweig, 1855. 


found him at Prague on the 30 th of November. He informed 
him of the pope's readiness to hold a council with which 
the Protestants themselves might be satisfied. The elector 
refrained from giving an independent assent to the papal 
plans, but referred the legate to the approaching assembly of 
the Protestants at Schmalkalden on the 6th of December. 
Tliis convention received the legate with all due honour ; 
its members expressed their readiness to take part in the 
council, but regretted that it mms not to be held in a German 
city, great stress being laid upon this objection. New 
obstacles, however, now opposed the convocation of the council. 
The vacancy of the Duchy of Milan occasioned a fresh 
outbreak of hostilities between Charles v. and Francis i. 
The Schmalkaldic Alliance meantime was gaining in strength 
and importance. Dukes Parnim and Philip of Pomerania, 
and Duke Ulrich of Wurtemberg, had joined the league ; 
it was further strengthened by the accession of the Count- 
Palatine Ptuprecht von Zweibriicken, Princes George and 
Joachim of Anhalt, Count William of Nassau, and several 
German cities — viz., Augsburg, Prankfort-on-the-Main, Ham- 
burg, Braunschweig, Gosslar, Hanover, and Gottingen. A 
renewal of the alliance for ten years was first proclaimed. 
The league was now capable of maintaining an army of 
10,000 footmen and 2000 cavalry soldiers. Poth French 
and English ambassadors attended the meeting of the alliance, 
and expressed a disposition to favour its plans. 

All this was encouraging. Still, however, there were 
excluded from the alliance those who, on account of their 
different views of the Lord's Supper, were regarded as Sacramen- 
tarians. But was no understanding between the two parties 
possible ? At least there were not wanting efforts to accom- 
plish such a result. A man was found who seemed to possess 
the gift of mediation in a high degree. It is a pity that the 
good-will of one of the parties concerned was lacking in 
perfect penetration and energy, and that the energy of tlie 
other party was deficient in good-will — qualities which are at 


all times requisite in order to the accomplishment of a real 
union. Let us take a nearer view of the individual whose 
sad lot it became to win the thanks of neither party and to 
excite the suspicions of both. 

Martin Bucer^ was the son of a cooper, named Klaus 
Butzer, and (like Socrates) of a midwife. He was born at 
Schlettstadt in Alsace in the year 1491, and attended the 
excellent school of that city. When he was but fifteen 
years old, he entered the order of the Dominicans, in com- 
pliance with the wishes of his grandfather. He soon 
succeeded in having himself transferred to Heidelberg, for 
the purpose of pursuing his studies at the University there. 
Following the Humanistic tendency, he became, like most of 
the superior minds of the age, an admirer of Erasmus. 
Luther's attack upon Tetzel made a still deeper impression 
upon him, however — an impression which was confirmed 
and strengthened by the appearance of the at 
Heidelberg in 1518, when Bucer was one of those who 
gathered around the welcome guest at the disputation. From 
that time his heart clung to the Pteformer of Wittenberg, 
whose writings (especially the Commentary on Galatians) 
exerted an ever-increasing influence over Bucer's theological 
studies, and whose fortunes he watched with intense interest. 
Luther, on the other hand, hoped great things from the 
promising youth, who, he declared, was " the only brother with- 
out guile " in the Dominican order (which, as we well know, was 
not favourably disposed towards Luther).^ The time at last 
arrived when Bucer withdrew from this order and laid aside 
the cowl, feeKng it to be a burden. He was released from the 
obligations of the brotherhood by the sufifragan-bishop of 

^ So called from the Latinized form of his name (Bucerus). His real name 
was Butzer {Putzer [Cleaner], Emunctor). From the Greek form, Biuxripos, 
arose the idea that he was called " Kuhhorn " [Cow's-horn]. Comp. Baum 
(in vol. iii. of the Vdter und Begrunder, etc.), Elberfield, 1860, and Schenkel's 
article in Herzog's Realenc. pp. 412 sqq. 

^ See Luther's letter to Spalatin, dated 12th February 1520, De Wette, i. 
No. 201. 



Speier, Aiitliony Engelbreclit, in a formal document given at 
Bruchsal on the 29tli of April 1521. Previous to this, 
through the mediation of Francis von Sickingen, he had 
become court chaplain to the Count-Palatine Frederick at 
Heidelberg. After having occupied several positions^ and 
married, he received, at Easter 1523, an appointment at 
Strassburg, where Zell and Capito were settled. His labours 
as a Peformer in the latter city have been elsewhere referred 
to, and we have now to do simply with his attitude in regard 
to the sacramental controversy. 

At the first outbreak of this controversy, Bucer expressed 
his regret that men " should be disputing about the carnal 
presence of Christ, instead of simply taking comfort in His 
sacrificial death by a believing participation in the sacra- 
ment. . . . Where the Lord is truly remembered, there is no 
room for concern about the bread and wine ; the whole heart 
and all the powers of a man will be bent upon proclaiming 
and extolling the Eedeemer's death." 

Bucer was present at the Conference of Bern and also at 
that of Marburg. "When Luther saw him at the latter place, 
he is said to have shaken his finger at him, exclaiming, 
" Thou art a rogue." At the Diet of Augsburg, it was he 
who, in the Confession of the four cities, gave expression to 
the opinions of those cities, or more especially to his own 
opinion and that of Strassburg. He had a conference with 
Luther at Coburg, the result of which was, that at the Con- 
vention of Schweinfurt, in the year 1532, Strassburg was 
received into the Schmalkaldic League.^ 

But the more Bucer, actuated by the best intentions and 
the sincerest love of truth, accommodated himself to the 
Lutheran modes of expression, so far as his conscience would 

^ He preaclied for some time at Land.stulil, and then accepted a call to 
Weissenburg, whence he was subsequently expelled. He had at first no 
definite appointment at Strassburg, but lectured on the Bible in the chapil of 
►St. Laurence, of which Zell (since 1518) was pastor. 

- The city subscribed the Confession of Augsburg without withdrawing Iroui 
the TetrapoUtana. 


permit, the more unfavourably was he regarded by the Swiss, 
who viewed his pliancy as weakness, or rather a betrayal 
of the truth. The Bernese uttered warnings against the 
"limping Strassburger." And indeed, if we call to mind 
how Luther continued to disparage the memory of Zwingle, 
we shall be able to comprehend the position of the Swiss. 
For instance, in a letter to Duke Albert of Prussia, written in 
1532,^ Luther warned the duke not to tolerate the Zwingiian 
doctrine in his territories ; which advice the Zurichers justly 
regarded as a breach of the treaty concluded at Marburg. 
Luther protested that he would have no fellowship with the 
" fanatics." " I shall," he writes, " henceforth have nothino- 
to do with them, and leave them to the judgment of God." 
He again announced his belief that the disastrous affair at 
Cappel was a divine judgment upon the Zwinglians. He 
also expressed his astonishment that the followers of Miinzer 
and Zwingle were not turned from their sinful course by such 
chastisements, and that they not only manifested a hardened 
persistence in their error, but even claimed that their chastise- 
ments were those of martyrs, and went on vindicating their 
own conduct and likening themselves to the holy martyrs. 
He made use of similar expressions on other occasions, and 
was, in short, determined not to yield a finger's breadth.^ 

What a difficult task was that of Bucer, with this iron will 
in opposition to him ! From the outset, Luther declined the 
mediatory overtures of Bucer. In 1531 (2 2d January)^ he 
frankly told him that he could not consent to any concord 
without doing violence to his conscience and sowing the seeds 
of far greater discord. To Duke Ernest of Liineburg he 

^ Probably in April. See De Wette, iv. No. 1445. 

' In 1534 he wrote to Justus Jonas as follows (De Wette, iv. No. 1613) : — 
" Ego de mea sententia cedere non possum, etiam fractus illabatur orbis, 
irapavidum me ferient ruinse." And again in an opinion {ibid. Nos. 1614, 
1615) : "And, finally, this is our opinion, that the body of Christ is truly 
eaten in and with the bread, and that all that the bread does and suffers is done 
and suffered by Christ's body, that body itself being distributed, eaten, and 
crushed with the teeth." 

^ De Wette, iv. No. 1347. 


wrote in a similar strain/ saying, " Such an agreement would 
doubtless result in a worse condition of affairs than at present 
exists." Bucer threw off much of the burden of his task of 
peace-making by declaring that the controversy was a battle 
about mere words. Tliis Luther would by no means admit ; 
yet he himself, in his calmer moments, thought it would be 
well " if both sides would desist from writing." 

We might cite from the letters of Luther many more 
passages in which he expresses grave scruples as to the 
expediency of any attempts to realize a union, objecting that 
all such attempts were lacking in internal harmony.^ In 
February 1535, however, he wrote to Philip of Hesse :^ 
" Thank God, I have attained to the comfortable hope that 
there are many among them " [those who differed from him 
in their views of the Lord's Supper] " who are true-hearted 
and earnest-minded men ; therefore I am now more inclined 
to an amicable agreement, one that shall he thorough and 
fermanent." His doubts as to the possibility of such an 
agreement had not disappeared even then; but if such an one 
should be effected, he would be ready to say with Simeon, 
" Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace." 

How, it may be asked, was the peace-loving Melanchthon 
disposed at this juncture ? His position was a peculiar one. 
He would on no account offend Luther. But he confessed to 
the landgrave, in a letter of September 1534, that he took 
no pleasure in the unfriendly writing and clamouring " on our 
part," but had always been, and still was, pained to the heart 
thereby. " I would gladly," he continues, " have assisted in 
labouring to establish a Christian concord. But after meeting 
with exceeding hardness, whence an increase of pain to others 
resulted, I have left the matter in God's hand." * 

' De Wette, iv. No. 1349. 

* In December ]r)34, he wrote as follows to Justus Jonas: — '^ Erjo quo plus 
cogito, hoc fio aleniore animo erga islam concordiam dejjeratam, cum ipsi inter 
86 sic varient" (De Wette, iv. No. 1G16). 

« De Wette, iv. No. 1628. 

* For furtlier particulars, see Scumidt, Melanchthon, pp. 311 sqq. 

MAETIN bucer's mediatoey effoets. 229 

Let us now follow the footsteps of Bucer as he traverses 
this thorny region, and observe with what indefatigable 
patience he devoted himself to the business of mediation. In 
May 1533 he visited Zurich, wishing to defend himself, at a 
convention of preachers assembled in that city, against the 
accusation of double-dealing, and to conjure the Zurichers not 
to write against Luther. It was desired that the Swiss and 
the Upper German theologians should first come to an agree- 
ment among themselves. For this purpose a meeting was 
called in mid- winter at Constance, in December 1534. The 
Swiss, however, did not make their appearance, some pleading 
sickness, and others the bad weather, in excuse for their 
absence ; none but deputies from Augsburg, Memmingen, 
Kempten, Isny, Lindau, Biberach, and Constance were present. 
It was agreed that for helievers the true bod}'- and true blood of 
Christ are present in the Lord's Supper, but that unhelievers do 
not partake of Christ's body. With this deliverance Bucer 
hastened to Cassel, undeterred by the bad roads of mid- winter. 
He there conversed with Melanchthon, who, in January 1535, 
communicated the result of the conference to Luther at 
Wittenberg. A plan for an agreement was next drawn up, in 
which, that all might be as weU satisfied as possible, a sacra- 
mental union of the bread and the body of Christ was set 
forth. This expression, it was thought, would attract the 
Swiss. As the latter had not attended the meeting at 
Constance in December 1534, another conference was 
appointed to take place at Aarau at the end of the year 1535. 
This was attended by Leo Juda and Bibliander of Zurich, and 
Oswald Myconius and Simon Gryneeus of Basel. The Aarau 
conference was, however, but preparatory to a larger conven- 
tion in the Augustinian cloister at Basel in January 1536. 
At this were present, beside the Zurichers, deputies from 
Bern, Schaffhausen, St. Gall, Miihlhausen, and Biel. Specially 
observable among those who took part in this conference were 
Bullinger, Myconius, Grynseus, Leo Juda, and Megander. 
Bucer did not fail to travel thither from Strassburg, and 


Capito accompanied him. The only result attained after 
lengthy debates was the acknowledgment of a true communion 
with the body and blood of Christ, with the distinct stipulation, 
however, that this expression was not to be apprehended as 
signifying a local presence in the bread. It was agreed that 
a Confession of Faith should be drawn up and communicated 
to Luther. This Confession, which treats not only of the 
Lord's Supper, but also of all the essential points of faith, was 
the First Helvetic Confession, called also the Second Confession 
of Basel, because it was composed at Basel, which city had 
already put forth its own particular Confession in 1534.^ 
Without delay, Bucer now proceeded to Eisenach, hoping to 
meet Luther there ; he, however, found only Melanchthon, 
Luther, who had travelled as far as Grimma, having excused 
himself on the plea of illness. The theologians in session at 
Eisenach, from Strassburg, Hesse, Saxony, and the Upper 
German cities, resolved to repair to Wittenberg, for the 
purpose of continuing the negotiations with Luther in due 
form, and a preliminary agreement was at length arrived at, 
which received the name of the Concord of Wittenberg. 

Luther was in a softer mood than usual. The main diffi- 
culty continued to be, whether the unbelieving partake of 
the body of Christ. This was the surest criterion of a purely 
objective understanding of the matter under discussion, — this 
the chasm which was continually reopening, however diligent 
the effort to cover over all gaps between the views of the 
different parties. But a lucky inspiration caused Luther to 
exclaim, " After all, why should we quarrel about unbelievers ? 
We receive you as brethren in Christ," and he stretched forth 
his hand in token of peace. He retained the same opinion as 
before, but no longer regarded that opinion as sufficiently 
important to be a cause of wrangling between himself and 
those who thought otherwise. A union was very far from 
being effected, but an understanding, a mutual toleration, was 
arrived at. 

■ See chap. xxiv. 


What a weight was lifted from Bucer's spirit by this 
declaration ! With tearful eyes and folded hands he gave 
thanks to God. He was ready at once to communicate the 
happy result of his efforts to the Swiss, and first of all to 
the brethren at Basel. The Swiss, however, were not pre- 
pared to strike hands at once upon this agreement ; they 
discovered all manner of catches and hitches in the terms 
employed. And who can blame them for their caution ? 
They did not wish to be surprised into unintentional 
concessions, nor would they entrench themselves behind 
ambiguous formulas. In the meantime the Second Basilian 
(First Helvetic) Confession was communicated to Luther 
through the medium of Bucer. Luther expressed himself 
favourably in regard to this Confession, even admitting at 
last that though " the great dissension could not be healed 
without leaving seams and scars, yet if both parties were in 
earnest and made diligent prayer to God, He would in time 
cause the difference to die out, and the troubled waters to 
become calm." 

Two memorials of Luther's peaceful mood — which, alas ! 
was but too transient — have come down to us, and from these 
it gives me pleasure to cite some passages. One of the 
memorials in question is a letter to James Meyer, burgomaster 
of Basel, dated 1 7th February 1537; the other is an epistle 
to the Eeformed cantons of Switzerland, of the 1st of December 
in the same year.^ 

Luther, in his letter, assures Burgomaster Meyer of his 
approval of the document transmitted to him (the Second 
Confession of Basel). He had observed in it, he states, an 
earnest desire for the furtherance of the cause of Christ's 
gospel, and he prays that " God will give us grace that we 
may all agree together in true and sincere harmony, and in 
assurance and unanimity of doctrine and opinion, to the end 
that, as St. Paul says, we may with one heart and one mouth 
praise God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and forgive 
1 De Wette, v. Kos. 1760 and 1784. 


aud bear with one another, as God the Father forgives iis and 
bears with us in Christ Jesus." It is no wonder, Luther 
further declares, that the differing parties had attacked each 
other somewhat severely, as the matter about which they had 
been contending was not jest, but earnest. He recommends, 
however, that all wounds and bruises should be forgotten, and 
that all should endeavour, by prayer to God, to strengthen 
themselves in the spirit of love. " We will not fail to do our 
part," he continues, " if your people will but refrain from 
frightening away the birds of concord, and will faithfully 
endeavour with us to promote peace. Tlie affair will not 
accommodate itself to us ; we must accommodate ourselves to it ; 
then God will give us His aid and His presence." Luther had 
conceived a particular liking for this burgomaster of Basel. On 
the Thursday after Beminiscere (the second Sunday in Lent) in 
the same year (1537), being in Gotha upon his return from 
Schmalkalden, he remarked to Bucer and Lykosthenes : " If 
I should die, take counsel of the letter which I wrote to the 
burgomaster of Basel, wJioni I like, and ivhom I regard as a pious 
and faithfid man." ^ 

In his epistle to the Confederate States (Zurich, Bern, Basel, 
Schaffhausen, St. Gall, Miihlhausen, and Biel) Luther makes 
use of an expression which he had once found fault with 
when employed by Zwingle, viz. : " The Holy Spirit must 
operate in our hearts ; the external word alone is net sufficient." 
He also says that he will not insist upon the idea that Christ 
comes down from heaven into the bread ; he will leave the 
man7ier in which His body and blood are given us to divine 
omnipotence ; it is unnecessary to conceive of any ascension 
or descension ; we may simply abide by the words, " This is 
my tody." Upon this condition he was ready " to offer heart 
and hand to the Swiss, and to maintain friendly relations with 
them, in order that worse evil might not ensue." For his 
own part he was disposed to " banish all resentment from his 
heart ; " he only feared that Satan, the enemy of concord, 
' 7'ischreden, Eiianger ed., iv. chap. vii. p. 123. 


would be able to find servants of his who would " cast trees 
and rocks in the way " of peace/ 

We come now to the cordial conclusion of the letter, which 
is as follows : — " Herewith I commend you and yours to the 
Father of mercy and consolation. May He give His Holy 
Spirit both to you and to us, that our hearts may be fused 
together in Christian love and Christian designs, and that we 
may be cleansed from all scum and rust of human and devilish 
malice and suspicion, to the praise and glory of His holy 
name and the salvation of many souls, as well as to the con- 
fusion of the devil and the pope and all their adherents. 

Let us now return to the negotiations of the German 
Protestants with the emperor and the pope. 

Paul III. had meantime, in 1536, actually appointed the 
council to be held at Mantua. In February 1537 the 
Evangelical states again assembled at Schmalkalden, and were 
visited, while in session, by the Papal legate. Van der Vorst 
(Yorstius), and the imperial vice-chancellor, Matthias Held. 
Luther's advice was to attend the council ; he declared that 
he was not afraid of that " hempen hobgoblin " {Han/putzeii], 
and occasion, he said, should not be given to charge the 
Lutherans with being the cause of the council not coming to 
pass.^ Notwithstanding Luther's advice, the elector and the 
states declined the invitation, thanking the emperor for his 
good-will. It was, however, resolved to transmit to the 
council a Confession, which Luther, by desire of the elector, 
had prepared in German. This document certainly could not 
be censured, as the Confession of Augsburg had been, for 
" stepping softly." Luther advanced with so bold and firm a 
tread that the earth groaned beneath him. "Without any 
figures of speech, he called the pope Antichrist, maintaining 

■^ He showed himself sufficiently unprejudiced to recognise the good in the 
Swiss churches, especially in reference to the administration of church discipline 
and excommunication. 

- See De Wette, v. No. 1759. 


that it was as great a shame to bestow upon him the appelha- 
tion of Master as to give that title to the devil, whose apostle 
he was. With equal plainness the Reformer styled the mass 
an abomination and the devil's dragon-tail, that had called 
into being a vast quantity of vermin and filth, etc. 

These "Articles of Schmalkalden"' were subscribed on the 
15th of February by all the Saxon, Hessian, and Swabian 
theologians present, and also by those of Strassburg, and were 
subsequently numbered among the symbols of the Lutheran 
Church. Melanchthon could not join in the tone in which 
Luther spoke of the pope. Upon his own responsibility he 
drew up an additional article, in which he testified his readi- 
ness to yield the highest place in the Church, hy human right, 
to the Bishop of Eome, so soon as the latter should give free 
course to the gospel. Luther was unable to attend the con- 
ferences in person. He was attacked by a malady from which 
he frequently suffered, and, as he grew no better, was taken to 
Wittenberg in one of the elector's carriages. After taking his 
seat in the vehicle, he exclaimed to the friends who had 
gathered about him, " May God fill you with hatred to the 
pope ! " 

Chancellor Held, finding that he could make no impression 
upon the Evangelical states, visited the various Catholic 
courts of Germany, and endeavoured to establish a counter 
alliance amongst these. Success attended his efforts. On 
the 10th of June 1538, the so-called "Holy Alliance" was 
concluded, for a period of eleven years, between the emperor 
and his brother Ferdinand, the Archbishops of Mentz and 

' Thoy consist of three parts. The first and shortest part contains the articles 
in which the teaching of the Evangelicals agreed with that of the Church of 
Eome (the doctrines of the Trinity, and the incarnation of God in Christ). Part 
second treats more fully of the differences of doctrine (justification hy faith, the 
mass, purgatory, pilgrimages, brotherhoods, relics, indulgences, invocation of 
saints, monkish congregations, the Papacy). Part third contains the articles 
" which we are at present discussing with learned and sensible men or amongst 
ourselves " (sin, law, gospel, baptism, the sacrament of the altar, power of the 
keys, confession, excommunication, consecration and vocation, marriage of 
})riests, the Church, good works, cloister vows, human ordinances). 


Salzburg, Dukes William and Louis of Bavaria, and Dukes 
Eric and Henry of Brunswick. These princes entered into an 
engagement of mutual aid in case any of the Protestant states 
should venture to take up arms against any of the allies, or 
should incite the subjects of the latter to revolt. Before the 
Protestants received reliable information of the establishment 
of this alliance, they held a meeting at Brunswick, and conferred 
upon the measures to be taken to effect their own security in 
case of need. At this meeting Christian iii., king of Denmark, 
the Counts of Tekelnburg, and the city of Kiga were received 
as members of the Schmalkaldic League. 

Through the mediation of the pope, a truce was proclaimed 
between the emperor and Francis i. soon after the conclusion 
of the Holy Alliance. In consequence of this truce the 
Schmalkaldic League lost the protection of France, whose 
policy now underwent a change. The Turks were at this 
time threatening Germany afresh, and there was again an 
urgent call for troops to repel the invader — a call which 
also demanded a speedy settlement of religious difficulties. 
Joachim ii., elector of Brandenburg, offered his services as 
mediator on this occasion. His father, Joachim i., whom he 
had succeeded in 15 35, had been a zealous Catholic; the son, 
however, was an adherent of the Evangelical doctrine, though 
not a member of the Schmalkaldic League. He accordingly 
assumed a mediatory position between the two parties. In 
February 1539, a peace meeting was held at Frankfort-on- 
the-Main, at which were present, besides the ambassadors of 
the emperor and King Ferdinand, the Elector of Saxony, the 
Landgrave of Hesse, the Elector-Palatine, and plenipotentiaries 
from different Evangelical states. Melanchthon and Bucer 
were also in attendance. Each party accused the other of 
having violated the Peace of Nuremberg. After somewhat 
lenghty debates, a truce {Austand) was at last concluded for 
fifteen months, reckoning from 1st May 1539. 

In the meantime a happy event for Protestantism took 
place in Saxony. Duke George, the old enemy of Luther and 



the Eeformation, departed this life on the 15th of April 1530. 
He died trusting in the grace of Christ. The pastor of 
Dresden endeavouring to persuade him to hold fast to the 
Epistle of James in matters relating to faith and good works, 
he turned to the Saviour and besought Him to have mercy 
upon him for the sake of His bitter sufferings and death. 
The Catholic party was plunged into consternation by the 
death of its most conspicuous representative. Duke Henry of 
Brunswick is said to have exclaimed that he would rather 
God in heaven were dead than Duke George. Shortly before 
his death, the duke, who had neither wife nor children living, 
sent councillors to his brother Henry, and declared himself 
ready at once to surrender the government to him if he would 
renounce the Lutheran religion and return to the Catholic 
Church. This Henry declined to do. George, on hearing of 
his brother's refusal, made his will, constituting Henry his 
heir, indeed, but only upon condition that the territory of 
which he was to become the ruler should continue Catholic, 
otherwise the dukedom should fall to King Ferdinand i. 
Fortunately for the Protestants, George died before the formal 
execution of the will, and Henry succeeded his brother with- 
out further trouble. Henry was a decided Protestant and a 
member of the Schmalkaldic liCague, which he had joined in 
1537. In his own district of Freiburg he had already intro- 
duced the Eeformation through the ministry of the court 
preacher, James Schenk of Wittenberg, The Eeformed doctrines 
and practices were now at once set in operation in those 
portions of the dukedom where the iron will of George had 
hitherto suppressed them. At Leipsic, the feast of Whitsun- 
tide 1549 was at the same time the birthday festival of the 
Evangelical Church in that city. The Elector of Saxony and 
the Wittenberg theologians were invited to be present on this 
occasion. Luther and Jonas preached. The people fell on 
their knees and with tears in their eyes thanked God for the 
victory of the gospel. On the 9 th of July a prohibition of 
private masses and of the administration of tlie Lord's Supper 


in one kind was issued. A visitation of all the churches 
throughout the dukedom, accomplished under the direction of 
Luther and the other theologians of Wittenberg, aided in 
completing the work of reform. Among the men who assisted 
in establishing the Eeformation in Leipsic and its vicinity, 
those of greatest note, in addition to Joachim Camerarius of 
Bamberg, the pupil and biographer of Melanchthon, were 
Nicholas Amsdorf, Frederick Myconius of Gotha, Caspar 
Cruciger, a native of Leipsic,^ etc. Henry did not long 
survive the joy of his work of Eeformation. He was suc- 
ceeded in 1541 by his son Moritz, to whom we shall revert 
at some subsequent period. 

Joachim ii., who had delayed introducing the Eeformation 
into his territories solely from fear of his father-in-law, 
Duke George of Saxony, gave the gospel free course after 
the death of George. On the 31st of October 1539, he 
partook of the Lord's Supper in the Evangelical mode in 
the cathedral at Cologne-on-the-Spree (Berlin). The new 
order of things was carried into effect by James Stratner, 
court preacher at Anspach, and George Buchholzer, provost 
of Berlin. 

At about this time some few Catholic princes also granted 
religious liberty to their subjects. Among those who thus 
acted were the Elector Louis, in the Upper Palatinate (1538), 
and the Elector (Cardinal) Albert of Mentz, in the districts 
of Magdeburg and Halberstadt (1539). It was only after 
long opposition that Halle, the residence of the archbishop and 
the second capital of the archbishopric of Magdeburg, was 
benefited by this tolerance. 

As early as the year 1524, George Winkler, of Bischofs- 
werda, had commenced preaching the Evangelical doctrines 
at Halle; but in 1527, however, he was summoned to 
Aschaffenburg by the archbishop, and there called to account 
for his teachings. On his journey homeward he was assas- 
sinated, and it was rumoured that the cardinal was privy to 
' Peessel, Caspar Cruciger, Elberfeld, 1862. 


the act.^ The cardinal strove in other ways to hinder the 
success of the Reformation in his residence, but the will of 
the burghers was at length victorious. After an unsuccessful 
application to Dr. Pfeffinger at Leipsic, the Evangelicals of 
Halle turned to Justus Jonas, who accepted the call which 
they extended to him, recognising in it a call of Providence. 
On the evening of Maundy Thursday (14th April 1541) he 
arrived at Halle, accompanied by a person named Poach; and 
on the day following, which was Good Friday, he preached 
his first sermon in the recently-built church of Our Lady. 
The threats of the archbishop were in vain ; and that magnate, 
perceiving that he could accomplish nothing thereby, at last 
left the apostate city and transferred his see to Mentz. Jonas 
continued to preach and, in conflict with other difficulties, 
to carry on the work of reform.^ Wittenberg had at first 
lent him to the people of Halle for three years only — an 
arrangement of which frequent instances are to be found 
in the history of the Eeformation. At the expiration of 
this time he was appointed " perpetual soul curate and 

The cordial interest taken by Luther not only in this 
pastoral choice, but also in general in the fortunes of indi- 
vidual churches, and the high estimate which he affixed to the 
office of an evangelical teacher or minister, which he believed 
to be associated with the most weighty responsibilities, may 
be gathered from a letter to the Council of Halle, a few words 
of ^\'llich we will cite in conclusion of this chapter.^ " It is a 
great grace and jewel when a city can with one heart sing 
the psalm, ' Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for 
brethren to dwell together in unity.' For I have daily and 
sorrowful experience of the rarity of this gift in cities and 
in the country. Therefore I could not refrain from writing 

1 See Luther's letter of consolation to the Christians at Halle, De Wette, 
Hi. No. 846, 

- Pressel, Justus Jonas, p. 77. 

3 Letter of 7th May 1545, De "Wette, v. No. 2275. 


to you of my joy ou your account, or from beseeching and 
exhorting you, as St. Paul besought and exhorted the Thessa- 
lonians, ' that ye persevere in the same way,' and, as the 
apostle says, ' continually increase and become stronger.' For 
we know that Satan is our adversary, and that he cannot 
endure such a divine work in us, but goeth about seeking 
whom he can devour, as St. Peter says. Hence it is very 
necessary to be vigilant, and to pray that we may not be 
overtaken by him." Luther then speaks of preachers as 
follows : " I hereby commend to your Christian love, preachers, 
ministers [or deacons], and schools, and especially Dr. Jonas, 
whom, as ye know, we unwillingly suffered to depart from us ; 
and I, for my part, would gladly have him near me again. 
They are precious, — such faithful, pure, and good preachers (as 
Jonas), — as we are daily convinced. God Himself esteems 
them precious, when He says, 'The labourers are few;' and 
St. Paul says, ' Here it is shown who is found faithful.' Hence 
he also commands that they should be held in double honour, 
and that they should be recognised as God's great and special 
gift, that the world may honour them, to its everlasting 








THE-MAiN — Luther's journey to eisleben : his sick- 

IN tlie meantime fresh attempts were made to accomplish, 
if possible, a " lovely Christian " union between the two 
sundered religious parties in the empire. The emperor con- 
voked an assembly at Speier, which, however, by subsequent 
order, was held at Hagenau, in Alsace, in the summer of 
1540. The Protestant party was here represented by second- 
rate men ; on the Catholic side Eck and Cochlaus were the 
principal speakers. Melanchthon left home for the purjmse 
of attending this meeting, but was taken ill at Weimar, his 
indisposition being occasioned by mental pressure as much as 
by physical disorder. As it was feared that he would not 
recover, the elector sent in utmost haste for Luther ; and it 
was then that the latter, as we have already related,^ besought 
God for his friend with powerful prayer, and received him at 
the hands of the Almighty as a new gift. Melanchthon 
himself confessed to his friends that it was in this wonderful 
way that he escaped death.^ In the conference at Hagenau 
the Catholics manifested an apparent readiness to make con- 

^ See vol. i. cliap. xvi. p. 408. 

^ In a letter to Cameraiius, Corp. lief. vol. iii. p. 1077. 


cessions, especially in the important doctrine of justification ; 
they, however, persisted in demanding that the word " alone " 
(by faith, in the doctrine of justification) must be omitted, and 
to this the Protestants could not consent. In other respects 
matters were to be allowed to rest as they were. A similar 
assembly was held at Worms in the beginning of the year 
1541. Previous to this latter meeting (in October 1540) 
the elector assembled his councillors and preachers at Gotha, 
where it was agreed not to yield one whit to the pope. The 
Elector of Brandenburg likewise charged his theologians to 
bring him back the word sola {alone by faith), or not to 
return at all. At the assembly at Worms the Papal legate, 
Thomas Campeggi, kept himself somewhat in the background, 
Granvella, the imperial minister, occupying the more promi- 
nent position. Among the Protestant theologians present 
were Melanchthon, Capito, Bucer, Osiander, Brenz, and also 
Calvin (from Strassburg). It was at this meeting that 
Melanchthon and Calvin became personally acquainted. The 
Catholic party was represented by Eck, Cochlteus, and Mal- 
venda, a learned Spaniard. The assembly was opened with 
the utmost magnificence, but it failed to produce any 
profitable result. After the disputants had debated for 
three days on the subject of original sin,^ an imperial rescript 
was issued on the 18 th of January, dissolving the assembly 
at Worms, but ordering that the discussions should be 
resumed at Eegensburg. On the 5th of April 1541^ 
the Diet of Eegensburg began its session. The landgrave 
of Hesse was among the first to arrive. He was mounted 
upon a magnificent fawn-coloured horse, and his proud 
bearing as he sat thus, surrounded by his trumpeters, so 

' The difference between the views of the two parties consisted mainly in the 
fact that Eck did not regard sinful desire {concupisceniia) as actual sin, while 
the Protestant view represented by Melanchthon was in this respect, as in 
many others, the stricter of the two. The Protestant reporters of the assembly 
could not sufficiently praise the manner in which Melanchthon dealt with 
his opponent. They compared Melanchthon to the nightingale and Eck to 
the raven. 



impressed the emperor as to cause him to exclaim, in his 
Netherlandish dialect, " As the steed is, so is the man ! " 
[ Wie de Gaul, so de Mann /] Soon afterwards, the Papal 
nuncio, Caspar Contarini, made his appearance. This envoy 
of the pope was a nohle Venetian, tolerant in sentiment, 
and partially inclined in favour of the Evangelical cause, espe- 
cially in respect of faith and justification, but so bound by his 
instructions as to be obliged to assume towards the Protestants 
an attitude which, compared with that of Granvella, was one 
of opposition.^ The emperor exerted every effort to secure 
as amicable a settlement of the differences as possible. For 
speakers he selected men of moderation, choosing, on the 
Catholic side, Julius von Pflug, dean of Meissen, and John 
Cropper, doctor of theology at Cologne. With these was 
associated the inevitable Eck ; he, however, fell ill during the 
course of the discussion, and quitted Eegensburg before its 
close. On the Protestant side, Melanchthon, Bucer, and John 
Pistorius,^ preacher at Nidda, in Hesse, were selected. Previous 
to the opening of the debate, the emperor summoned the 
six collocutors before him, extended his hand to each one, and 
charged them to speak freely and fearlessly, but to keep the 
proceedings secret. The presidents appointed by Charles were 
Frederick, the count-palatine, and the minister Granvella. 
Some deputies to the Diet were constituted witnesses, Gran- 
vella produced a document which, he affirmed, the emperor 
had had prepared by persons of integrity.^ In this paper the 

^ See Weizsacker's excellent article on Contarini in Herzog's Rcalenc. iii. 
pp. 148 sqq. "The most intrinsic distinction between the Italian and the 
German experience of the reformational current is illustrated in the fact that 
Contarini's view of faith, being, as it was, the product of calm, intellectual 
research, preserved an aristocratic impress." 

" The son of this Pistorius subsequently returned to the Romish Church. 

3 " A written statement, composed, as your Majesty has been informed, by 
some learned and God-fearing persons, and presented to your Majesty." Various 
conjectures concerning the authorship of this document have been advanced. 
For a longtime the above-mentioned Cropper was regarded as the author, — this 
was Melanchthon's view, — but Eck, Contarini, Bucer, and George Wicel (whom 
we shall have occasion to speak of again) have also been propounded as probable 
authors. Modern investigation has shown that the writer was assuredly Gropper, 


doctrine of justification by faith is unhesitatingly commended 
as sound, faith being explained as an inward motion produced 
by the Spirit of God, and, conjointly with love, communicated 
(poured in) to the soul from above. More than this admission 
the Evangelicals could not demand. And yet it was no 
trustworthy foundation for a peace. The sharper- sighted 
espied in the conjunction of faith with love a snare to entrap 
the Protestants. The word sola would undoubtedly fall a 
sacrifice to such a connection. Notwithstanding this considera- 
tion, however, an agreement upon th€ article was arrived at 
with tolerable rapidity. Greater difficulty was experienced in 
the discussion of the more practical questions concerning the 
Church and its constitution, divine service, the sacraments, the 
marriage of priests, etc. The conference w^as terminated on 
the 2d of May. The two parties continued to differ except 
in regard to four articles, which related to the condition of 
man before the fall, to free will, original sin, and justification. 
These articles were, in reality, the most important from a 
doctrinal point of view ; but that, for the time being, was not 
the predominant view-point. No agreement was arrived at 
in respect of the ten remaining articles. Of course, it was 
impossible for Luther to be satisfied with this Eegensburg 
Interim, as the form of agreement was denominated, on 
account of its interimic character. In it the apple of his eye, 
the doctrine of justification by faith alone, was attacked. He 
called it " a vamped-up thing, poorly pieced and stuck to- 
gether ; a patch of new cloth upon an old garment, whereby 
the rent is made worse." ^ The Catholic princes also were 

but that he was assisted by Gerard Volikruck (Veltwyck ?), a young statesman 
who laboured under Granvella. The book was afterwards submitted to Bucer 
and Capito, and subjected to manifold alterations at the suggestion of the former. 
For further particulars, see Gieseler, /i j?'c/te?«;7. iii. chap. i. p. 311 ; andKLiPPEL, 
in Herzog's Realenc. xii. p. 593. 

1 See Luther's letter of 10th May 1541, to the Elector John Frederick (De 
Wette, v. No. 1937). "We hold," the Reformer continues, "that man is 
justified by faith, without any work of the law ; this is our text and formula 
whereby we abide ; it is short and clear ; and the devil, Eck, Mainz, and 
Heinz may storm against it as they will." The composers of the Interim had 
cited in support of their view, amongst other passages, Gal. v. 6, where it 


dissatisfied with the agreement, and even declined to accept 
the four articles agreed upon. The Dukes of Bavaria had 
from the outset been opposed to the whole project of union ; 
they would have preferred cutting the knot with the sword. 
The emperor, therefore, found himself compelled, on account 
of the Turks, to revive the Peace of Nuremberg in his recess of 
the 29th of June. " The upholders of the Confession of Augs- 
burg," it was declared in this recess, "shall not seduce any of the 
subjects of the Catholic^ states from their allegiance, but no one 
shall be prevented from professing the religion of the former." 
Among the participants in this unedifying transaction, 
there was no one who found himself in a more unpleasant 
position than Melanchthon. His love of peace had induced 
him to make concessions which, in many cases, were contrary 
to his theological convictions, and bitterly did he now reproach 
himself " I am punished by God," he writes to Camerarius, 
" and suffer deservedly on account of my other sins, as well as 
for the readiness with which I lent myself to these worthless 
and dissolute counsels." And yet, with all his love of peace, he 
had failed to satisfy the emperor. Charles was displeased with 

is declared that "in Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision availeth 
anything, but faith, which worketh by love." "This saying," Luther 
justly observes, "refers not to the becominy just, but to the life of the just." 
There is a great difference between Jleri et agere, esse et facere, as schoolboys 
learn, — between the verhum activum et passivum. Becoming and doing are two 
different matters : "To become a tree and to bear fruit are two distinct things." 
See also the letter of 12th June to the Princes John and George of Anhalt (No. 
1994). These princes, in conjunction with the Elector Joachim of Brandenburg 
and other states, had despatched a magnificent deputation to Luther from Regens- 
bui'g, in the hope of securing liis support for the union. He writes to them as 
follows : — " Granting, even, that his Imperial Majesty's intentions are altogether 
gracious and sincere, the [lioniish] [)arty are not seeking in earnest an agreement 
which shall bo agreeable to God and in accordance with the truth. In making 
a pretence of so doing, they are trifling with his Imperial Majesty ; for if they 
were in earnest, they would not fail in coming to an understanding upon the ten 
articles, for they are well aware that all ten are mightily and in bona con- 
Hcientia condemned by the four upon which an agreement has been reached, and 
especially by the article on justification." 

^ The term Catholic ajjpears here for the first time as the name of the anti- 
Protestant party. (The Protestants were content to be, and to remain Catholic; 
they objected only to being Roman Catholic.) Prior to this time the opponents 
of the Protestants were (more correctly) called Papists. 


him because he had not conceded enough, and complained 
to the landgrave that Melanchthon had his arrows feathered 
by Luther. The Elector of Saxony, however, commended 
Melanchthon for his stedfastness. 

The horizon now presented a gloomy aspect, and fresh 
complications arose. By the death of Bishop Philip of Naum- 
burg - Zeitz (in January 1541), the episcopal see of that 
province was rendered vacant. The Elector of Saxony there- 
upon conceived it to be his duty to avail himself of this 
favourable opportunity to install a Protestant bishop in the 
vacant see, and thus to gain the province for the cause of the 
Eeformation. The bishopric afforded a soil not unfavourable 
for his purpose. In the year 1520, a certain person named 
Pfennig had preached the Eeformed doctrines in Naumburg^ 
but had been obliged to flee to Bohemia. He had been 
succeeded by others — John Langer and John Cramer; Justus 
Jonas and Jerome Weller had also preached there at Easter 
1536. At the time of the vacancy, the Evangelical pastor 
and superintendent Nicholas Mebler was labouring there, 
having occupied his post since 1537. This was the person 
towards whom the elector's thoughts first turned when the filling 
of the vacant see claimed his consideration. His action in 
the matter was, however, anticipated by the cathedral chapter. 
That body had for a time concealed the death of Philip, and, 
relying upon its corporate rights, hastily elected Julius von 
Pflug as his successor. The elector would not recognise this 
choice. By virtue of his own sovereign power he possessed 
himself of the episcopal prerogatives, and constituted Nicholas 
Amsdorf, the friend of Luther, and until then the super- 
intendent of Magdeburg, administrator of spiritual affairs 
with the title of bishop. The installation of Amsdorf took 
place on the 20th of January 1542, in presence of the 
elector and a vast concourse of people. Luther performed 
the ordination in a simple manner, assisted by the pastors of 
ISTaumburg, Altenburg, and Weissenfels. Before the act the 
Latin hymn, Veni Creator Spiritus, was sung, followed, at 


the completion of the ordination, l)y the German Hcrv Gott, 
dich lohen loir [" We praise Thee, Lord God "].^ The canons 
were required to make oath that they would render obedience 
to the bishop, in accordance with the word of God and the 
command of Christ. Such of the nobles as resisted had their 
estates confiscated, and one was even cast into prison. Amsdorf, 
however, soon felt uncomfortable in his new situation, and 
sorely needed Luther's encouragement. He was subsequently 
released from so false a position by the Schmalkaldic War. 

Still another act of violence was performed by the 
Evangelicals, to the further aggravation of their opponents. 
Duke Henry the younger of Brunswick, a bitter adversary of 
the Eeformation,^ had undertaken to chastise the city of 
Goslar, and had reduced it to the most desperate condition. 
Moved by indignation at the conduct of Henry, the Elector 
of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse invaded his dominions 
in July 1542, and obliged him to take refuge with the 
Dukes of Bavaria. The Protestant princes then immediately 
introduced the Eeformation in Brunswick, and declared that 
with their consent the exiled duke should never re-enter his 
dominions, wliich, however, they proposed to restore to his 
sons. The Imperial Chamber espousing the cause of the 
banished duke, the elector and the landgrave refused obedi- 
ence to that court. Upon the entry of the victors into the 
conquered stronghold of Wolfenbiittel on the 13 th of August, 
Dionysius Melander, court and field chaplain to the landgrave, 
celebrated the victory by preaching a sermon on Christ's 
entry into Jerusalem. Bugenhagen and Corvinus were sum- 
moned to assist in drawing up regulations for the state church, 
which was thenceforth to be Evangelical. A number of 
excesses were perpetrated here, as elsewhere.^ 

'Luther afterwards boasted that they had consecrated a bishop " witliout 
chrism, without butter, salt, lard, tar, grease, incense, or coals." 

* It was against him that Luther wrote that intensely coarse treatise, Wider 
Hans Worst. 

^ In the cloister of Kiddagshausen, on the 21st of July 1542, the altars ami 
organs were destroyed, the coffers were broken open, chalices, monstrances, and 


The neighbouring bishopric of Hildesheim at this time 
threw off the yoke of its bishop, Valentine Teutleben, and 
introduced the Eeformed doctrines and practices into the 
Church, with the co-operation of Bugenhagen, who issued a 
form of church service in 1544. 

Eegensburg also, which had become better acquainted with 
Protestantism in consequence of the Diet of 1541, now 
turned decidedly to the Eeformation. "When the first Evan- 
gelical preacher, Erasmus Zollner, pastor of St. Emmeran's, by 
order of the council delivered his first sermon in the newly- 
built church on the 5th of February 1542, the concourse of 
people was so great that it became necessary to break down 
the new doors of the edifice.^ In the same year, the count- 
palatine. Otto Henry, established the Eeformation at Neuburg, 
availing himself of the advice and assistance of his court 
chaplain, Michael Diller, and Andrew Osiander of Nuremberg. 
In the territory of Cleves, Duke William had been favourable 
to the Eeformation since the year 1539. Even the Bavarian 
dukes, the most decided opponents of Eeform, were obliged 
to permit the reforming tendency to make a way for itself 
within their own borders. 

Most remarkable of all was the course of affairs at 
Cologne. The Elector and Archbishop Hermann, Count of 
Wied by birth, had, in 1536, in company with the bishops 
of his province, held an ecclesiastical assembly at Cologne, 
when various plans of reform were proposed and the grossest 
abuses were abolished. All this might be effected within the 
pale of the ancient Church, and in accordance with its 

mass vestments were stolen, the wafers were desecrated, the images were dashed 
in pieces, the inmates of the cloister were expelled, and the chm'ch was con- 
verted into a stable. Similar proceedings occurred at Gandersheim and else- 
where. See, besides, Lentz, Geschichte der Einfuhrung des evangelischen 
Bekenntnisses im Herzogthum Braunschweig, "Wolfenbiittel, 1830 ; Koldewey, 
Die Reformation des Herzogthums Braunschiveig- Wolfenbiittel tenter dem 
Regimente des Schmalkaldischen Bundes, 1542-47, Hanover, 1869. Fresh 
sources of information were consulted in the preparation of the latter work, 
which is, moreover, written with much penetration. 
1 Marheineke, iv. p. 219 (after Seckendorf). 


principles; but in 1539 the archbishop proceeded still 
farther, and requested Melanchthon to furnish him with a 
written opinion. Finally, having been won over to the 
Reformation (in the Protestant sense of the term) by the con- 
ferences of Worms and Eegensburg, he called Martin Bucer 
to Bonn, the archi-episcopal residence. The measures adopted 
by the archbishop excited the strenuous opposition of the 
cathedral chapter, and also of Gropper, although the latter 
was himself half in favour of the Eeformation ; the pope like- 
wise expressed regret at the occurrences. In the further 
establishment of the Eeformation at Cologne, Melanchthon 
played an important part, bringing the matter, in measure, to 
a conclusion by the Order of Eeform which he issued. 

Count Francis of Waldeck, bishop of Miinster, who at first 
had opposed the cause of Eeform in that city, but had sub- 
sequently been compelled to ally himself with Protestant 
princes in his conflict with the Anabaptists, also became a 
friend to the Eeformation at this time, and in 1543 applied 
for admission into the Schmalkaldic League. In order to the 
consummation of the Eeform in Miinster, Osnabriick, and 
Minden, he extended a call to Hermann Bonn, rector at 
Lubeck.^ Bonn prepared a liturgy in Low German. The 
canons at Miinster, like those of Cologne, resisted the 

Another Diet was convoked at Speier in the year 1544. 
The subject of aid against the Turks was again discussed, but 
was promptly thrust aside by the declaration of the Pro- 
testants, that before affording such relief they must be assured 
of a permanent peace and of equal rights with the Catholics. 
Through the mediation of the Electors of Brandenburg and the 
Palatinate, a recess of the following purport was secured. 
Eeligious controversy, it was declared, had arrived at such a 
height, and had occasioned such disorder in Germany, as to 
be susceptible of settlement by nothing save a general, free, 

^ See Luther's letter to Bonn, dated 5th August 1534, De Wette, v. No. 


Christian council of the German nation. It was ordered that 
at a new Diet, to be held at Worms, the two parties should 
submit to eacli other plans of reform, upon which a friendly 
Christian agreement might be established. It was decreed 
that the Imperial Chamber should continue as it was for 
three years longer, but that within that time no fresh suits 
against Protestants should be undertaken. The Peace of 
Nuremberg, ratified at Eegensburg, was to continue. In the 
administration of oaths, it should be optional with every 
person to swear either by God and His saints, or by God and 
His Holy Gospel. 

The majority of the Catholic states were dissatisfied with 
this recess, and Cochlaeus wrote an article against it. The 
pope was especially indignant thereat. " A host of evil 
spirits, actuated by hatred against the Eomish Church, must," 
he wrote, " have led the emperor thus grossly astray at Speier ; 
by this recess Charles has jeoparded his own soul and 
introduced confusion into the Church." The pope was 
particularly offended at the emperor's undertaking to appoint 
a council, that being the prerogative of the pope alone. He 
demanded that Charles should revoke all the unauthorized 
concessions which he had made to the enemies of the Church, 
and threatened the emperor with his lasting displeasure in 
case he should refuse obedience to this admonition. This 
deliverance of Ptome against the emperor summoned Luther 
into the field once more. In 1545 he wrote the tractate 
entitled, Wider das Fapstthum, so zu Bom voon Teufel gestiftet. 

By the Peace of Crespy, which Charles v, concluded with 
his rival, Francis i., on the 18th of September 1544, the 
emperor was enabled to devote more of his attention to the 
Protestant alliance. Under date of 15th March of the same 
year, the pope had appointed the long-desired council to take 
place at Trent ; it was to have been opened in March of the 
ensuing year, but did not reaUy begin until December. The 

^ This tractate was furnished with an illustration, in which the pope was 
represented as wearing ass's ears and surrounded by devils. 


proposed Diet of Worms met in the begimiing of 1545. As 
Charles was ill at the time, it was opened by Ferdinand, but 
was subsequently attended by the emperor himself. At the 
request of the Elector of Saxony, the Wittenberg theologians, 
with Melanchthon at their head, had prepared a new treatise, 
setting forth the principles of the Reformation, with special 
reference, moreover, to church government. This treatise 
was composed in a mild and judicious tone. Chancellor 
Briick thanked God that it bore no traces of Luther's clamorous 
spirit. In this document, which was entitled, Wittenhergische 
Bcformation, considerable concessions were made to the 
authority of bishops ; provided, always, that the latter set forth 
pure doctrine, that being represented as a prime necessity. 
The invitation to attend the council was persistently declined 
by the Protestants, who maintained that it would not be a 
free council. The emperor once more proposed a religious 
conference, to be held at Eegensburg at the end of the year 
1545, immediately before the opening of the Diet: this con- 
ference, which actually took place in the beginning of 1546,^ 
was as fruitless as those which had preceded it. During 
the discussions, a great Protestant Diet was held at Frankfort- 
on-the-Main, attended not only by members of the Schmal- 
kaldic League, but also by others professing the same faith. 
A feeling of uneasiness was everywhere prevalent. On all 
sides were rumours of warlike preparations on the part of the 

In the midst of these preparations for war, Luther was 
removed from time to eternity. In the beginning of 1545 a 
report of his death had arisen in Italy, and was thence 
diffused. It was alleged that he had died suddenly, after 
partaking of the sacrament, and that he had previotisly 
directed that his body should be placed upon an altar and 

^ The speakers appointed on the Catholic side were Peter ]\Ialvenda, a Spaniard ; 
Erhard Billicus, a Carmelite monk ; John Hofmeister, an Augustinian ; and 
Cochl?eus. On the Protestant side, Bucer, Schnepff, Brenz, and G. Major wure 


worshipped as God — an order which, it was further declared, 
had been the means of restoring many to their senses and 
to the old faith. The book containing this fable fell into 
Luther's hands, and was reissued by him with a preface, in 
which he says : " And I, Martin, hereby acknowledge and 
testify that I received this wrathful fiction of my death on 
the 21st of March, and that I read it gladly and joyfully, 
with the exception of the blasphemous dedication of such 
a lie to the high Divine Majesty. Otherwise I am well 
pleased^ that the devil and his tools, the pope and the 
Papists, hate me so heartily. May God turn them from the 
devil," etc. 

Luther, towards the end of his life, had much to contend 
with at Wittenberg of an unpleasant nature. Among other 
things, he was vexed at the jurists' attempt to revive the 
Canon Law, which he had abolished and burned.^ That, 
however, which most deeply grieved his soul was the worldly 
bias that the Reformation had received even in his own 
vicinity, so that many, trusting in the grace of God, were 
according too much liberty to the flesh. So indignant did he 
become, in 1545, at the excesses in Wittenberg, that he 
wrote from Leipsic to his wife as follows : — " Let us away from 
that Sodom ! I would rather beg my bread than disquiet 
and torture my poor last days by beholding the disorderly 
doings at Wittenberg, and the proof which they afford that 
my toilsome but beloved labours have been in vain."^ He 
actually quitted the city, purposing never to return, and re- 
paired to Zeitz, to his friend Amsdorf, bishop of Naumburg. 
It was only through the entreaties of the elector that he was 
prevailed upon to go back to Wittenberg. 

^ [Literally, " it occasions a pleasant sensation in my right knee-pan and my 
left heel," etc.] 

^ [See chap. vi. — Tk.] 

3 See the letter to his wife, written at the end of July (De Wette, v. No. 
2286). He prophesies no good to the city of Wittenberg, and fears that it will 
get neither St. Vitus' dance nor St. John's dance, but the Beggars' or Beelzebub's 
dance, as a punishment for its immorality and contempt for the Divine Word. 
See also the letter to the students of Wittenberg, 13th May 1543 (No. 2142). 


Frequent illnesses had by this time considerably shattered 
Luther's physical strength, added to which he had undergone 
no little mental suffering, occasioned by the course of affairs 
in the Church of Christ. Aniid all these trials, however, he 
preserved that joyousness of faith and that childlike spirit 
which so frequently excite our admiration as we contemplate 
his life. Nay, more, while an excessive vehemence occasion- 
ally disfigures the Eeformer's character in the middle years of 
his life, in his old age we behold the ascendancy acquired by 
a certain tenderness of sensibility that often causes him to 
break forth in melancholy lamentation, and that, despite the 
harshness which he continued to exhibit toward some of his 
opponents, — the Sacramentarians, for instance, — endues him 
with a mildness and loveliness in which there is something of 
almost heavenly glory, and which speedily reconciles us to 
his occasional ill-humours. This peculiar tenderness now and 
then assumed the form of a momentary weariness of life — a 
feeling which, however, soon gave place to a higher trustful- 
ness. Thus Luther says, in a sermon of 1545 : "I am tired 
of tlie world, and the world is tired of me ; it will therefore 
be easy for us to part company, as a guest leaves the inn 
where he has sojourned." And in the beginning of January 
1546 he writes to a friend:^ " I, an old, decrepit, sluggish, 
weary, cold, and now also one-eyed man, write to you — I, who 
had hoped that by this time rest would be vouchsafed me, — 
which, I think, would be reasonable, — am overwhelmed with 
writintj, talking, doing, and acting, to as great a degree as if 
I had never acted, written, talked, or done anytliing before. 
But Christ " (thus he joyfully encourages himself) " is all in 
all to me ; He can and does perform all things. Praise be 
to Him eternally." Luther had often said that he desired 
nothing more except a gracious death. His wish was now to 
be accomplished. 

In the same month to which we have referred, above, 
January 1546, he was summoned to Eisleben on some business 

iTo James Probst at Bremen (Dk Wette, v. No. 2310; Keil, p. 251). 

luthee's journey to eisleben. 253 

concerning the Counts of Mansfeld. The affair was a secular 
one, relating to the mines ; but the man of God was resorted 
to in this case also, as an arbiter between disagreeing brethren. 
His journey, on which he was accompanied by his three sons, 
was rendered very perilous by the freshets. In crossing 
the Saale he narrowly escaped drowning, and afterwards 
humorously recounted his adventures in letters to his wife 
and friends. To Jonas, his faithful companion, who was with 
him on the vessel, he said : " Dear Doctor Jonas, would it 
not have been a rare treat to the devil if I, Doctor Martinus, 
with my three sons, and yourself, had been drowned in the 
waters ?" And from Halle he wrote, on the 25th of January, 
the following : ^ — 

" Grace and peace in the Lord. Dear Kate, we arrived at 
Halle at eight o'clock to-day, but did not drive on to Eisleben, 
for there met us a huge Anabaptist, with billows of water 
and great cakes of ice ; she covered the land and threatened 
to rebaptize us. We were prevented also from going back by 
the rising of the Mulda, and were therefore obliged to lie 
still at Halle, betwixt the waters. Not that we thirsted for 
them ; on the contrary, we took some good Torgau beer and 
some good Ehenish wine, and therewith refreshed and con- 
soled ourselves while we waited, hoping that the Saale 
would have its passion out. For as the servants and drivers, 
and we ourselves also, were apprehensive of danger, we were 
unwilling to commit ourselves to the water and tempt God ; 
for the devil has a grudge against us, and he dwells in the 
water, and prevention is better than regret, and there is no 
need for us to prepare a fools' festival for the pope and his 
associates. I should not have thought that the Saale could 
make such an uproar, that it could storm over causeways and all 
as it does. I shall say no more at present, except, ' Pray for us, 
and be good.' I think, if you had been here, you would have 
advised us to do precisely as we are doing, and thus we 

1 De Wette, v. No. 2312. See also those other charming letters, Nos. 2315, 
2317, 2318, 2320, 2322. 


should for once have followed your advice. Herewith I 
commend you to God. Amen." 

His faithful Kate manifesting constant anxiety concerning 
his health, he reproved her, sometimes in jest and sometimes 
in earnest, for so doing. In a letter of the 6 th of February, 
from Eisleben, he recommends her to read the Shorter 
Catechism, of which she had once remarked that everything 
in the book was applicable to herself. " You would fain," he 
declares, " charge yourself with the affairs of your God, just as 
if He were not almighty and could not create ten Dr. Martins, 
if the old one should be drowned in the Saale. A truce to 
your cares ! I have One who takes better care of me than 
you and all the angels could. He lies in the manger on His 
mother's breast . . . and yet sits on the right hand of God, 
the Almighty Father. Be at peace, therefore. Amen."^ 

The solicitude of Luther's wife was, however, not so un- 
necessary as the Eeformer thought. His journey in the stormy 
weather had given him a severe cold, so that his old maladies 
returned. At the same time he laboured incessantly, not 
only in the suit committed to him by the princes, but also at 
ecclesiastical affairs, and preached besides four times, notwith- 
standing his indisposition. On Wednesday, the I7th of 
February, his illness made marked advances, and thoughts of 
a speedy departure thronged before his wearied soul. "What 
if I were to remain here at Eisleben, where I was baptized ? " 
he said. At table he spoke much of death and immortality, 
and discussed the question as to whether departed spirits will 
recognise each other in another world. Soon afterwards he 
was attacked by pains which prevented liini from enjoying 
any repose in bed, so that he flung himself on his couch or 
paced the room by turns. Eubbing with w^arm cloths, a 
remedy to which he had often before had recourse, afforded 
him but little relief. Physicians were summoned. Count 
Albert of Mansfeld and his wife visited Luther's sick-room, 

^ In the same letter he again jestingly refers to the devil, charging him with 
everywhere spoiling the beer with his pitch and the wine with his brimstone. 


bringing with them various remedies. The Eeformer's careful 
wife likewise sent medicines from Wittenberg. Jonas and 
Colius, the preacher at Eisleben, stood, wavering between fear 
and hope, by the bedside of their friend, and united their 
prayers with his. " My heavenly Father," thus the Eeformer 
prayed, " eternal and merciful God ! Thou hast revealed to 
me Thy dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ ; Him have I 
taught. Him have I acknowledged. Him I love and honour as 
my dear Saviour and Eedeemer, whom the wicked persecute, 
dishonour, and revile. Take my soul unto Thyself." He 
then said three times in succession, " Father, into Thy 
hands I commend my spirit. Thou hast redeemed me. Thou 
faithful God ! " after which he lapsed into silence. His 
attendants shook, rubbed, and fanned him, but he made no 
reply to their demonstrations. Finally his bosom friend, 
Jonas, bent over him and said in a loud voice, " Eeverend 
father, is it your desire to die in the doctrine which you have 
preached ? " to which the Eeformer returned a vigorous "Yes!" 
and soon afterwards resigned his spirit to his Maker. He 
departed this life at four o'clock in the afternoon of 
the 18th of February 1546, in the sixty-third year of his 
age. His spirit will live for ever in the history of his 
people, his church, and humanity. Since, moreover, it is 
inherent in the nature and custom of mankind to treat the 
exanimate remains of the departed with the same respect that 
is due to the spirit that has fled, we may be permitted to add a 
few words in regard to the funeral of Luther, after which we 
propose to sketch briefly the fortunes of his surviving relatives. 
The princes with whom he was specially connected regarded 
the possession of the mighty dead as an honour, and con- 
tended for the right of giving him sepulture. The Counts of 
j\iansfeld would gladly have kept him in Eisleben, where he 
was born and baptized. The Elector John Frederick of 
Saxony would not, however, consent to such an arrangement, 
but maintained that Wittenberg, the scene of his labours and 
struggles, should also be his resting-place. The body of Luther, 


therefore, after having lain in state for some time, with solemn 
ceremonies, was enclosed in a tin cofQn and transported to 
Wittenberg, with an escort of forty-five horsemen, at whose 
head rode the Counts of Mansfeld. The greatest interest 
was manifested at every place through which the funeral train 
passed. Bells were rung, processions issued forth to meet 
the illustrious dead, and dirges, interrupted by frequent sobs, 
were rather wailed than sung. The carriage which conveyed 
the remains was often obliged to halt by reason of the press. 
At Halle the concourse of people was especially great. The 
corpse was there received by the clergy, the council, and 
the youth from all the schools of the city. The march of the 
funeral cortege was impeded, the hearse was brought to a 
stand-still, and it was not until a late hour that the pro- 
cession arrived at church, where the hymn, Aus ticfer Noth 
schrci' ich zu dlr " [" From deep distress to Thee I cry "], was 
sung amid the sobs of the multitude. The coffin remained 
overnight in the sacristy, under a guard. On the 2 2d, 
Wittenberg was reached. At the Elster Gate, the same 
before which Luther had once burned the papal bull, stood 
the rector and professors of the University, the council, and 
the entire burgher population of the city, besides the deputies 
of the elector, the Counts of Mansfeld, about sixty knights, 
and many more princes and gentlemen who were studying at 
Wittenberg, all of whom escorted the illustrious dead to the 
castle cliurch. The sorrowing widow of the deceased, seated 
in a mean little waggon, also followed the coffin, accompanied by 
her sons. Doctor Bugenhagen preached the funeral discourse, 
but was prevented from concluding by tears that drowned his 
voice, Melanchthon delivered a Latin oration. Near the 
pulpit in which Luther had taught, a grave had been prepared, 
into which the Ptcformer's coffin was lowered by Masters of 
Arts connected with the University. 

Melanchthon had previously announced to his hearers the 
melancholy tidings of Luther's death. " Alas ! " exclaimed he 
on this occasion, " the leader and chariot of Israel are taken 


away ; departed is he who hath led the Church in this last 
hoary age of the world." He further enlarged on the merits 
of Luther in the Latin oration which he delivered at the close 
of Bugenhagen's discourse. Upon the Elector of Saxony 
devolved the sad duty of despatching notices of Luther's 
death in all directions. The answers to these notifications 
make manifest the high esteem in which the Eeformer was 
held by the Evangelical princes.-^ 

A few words more concerning Luther's family.^ After the 
melancholy issue of the Schmalkaldic War, his widow was 
compelled to leave Wittenberg. She removed to Leipsic, 
where she suffered extreme privation and was compelled to 
take boarders to gain a livelihood. Melanchthon, like a faithful 
friend, assisted her in her destitution to the utmost of his 
ability. She subsequently returned to Wittenberg; when, 
however, the plague broke out in that city in 1552, she set 
out with her children for Torgau, and in journeying thither 
met with an accident that hastened her end. The horses 
behind which she was travelling taking fright, she jumped out 
of the carriage and fell into a ditch, and from terror and cold 
contracted an illness which speedily resulted in death. She 
was buried in the parish church of Torgau, with many demon- 
strations of respect, 

Luther left three sons and one daughter, several of his 
children having died in advance of their father. The three 
sons devoted themselves to three of the learned professions. 
John, the eldest, studied jurisprudence ; the second one, 
Martin, embraced the study of theology ; and Paul, the third 
son, chose the medical profession and became body-physician 
at the Saxon Court. The male line of Luther was continued 
through the youngest son only, and subsisted until the year 

' For particulars see Marheineke, vol. iv. pp. 349 sqq. 

2 Luther made his will in 1542, and the elector ratified it in 1546. It may 
be found in De Wette'.s work, voL v. ISTo. 2038. His portrait was painted by 
his friend Lucas Cranach, during the Reformer's life as well as after his death. 



REVIEW OF Luther's character — outbreak of the schmal- 







HAVING accompanied Luther on his last journey, let us 
pause for a while beside his grave and look back upon 
that great life of his, so full of battles and so fruitful of 
blessing for others. Wherein, we would ask, consisted Luther's 
greatness ? Did it lie in his learning ? in the extent, the 
fulness, and depth of his knowledge ? Erasmus was more 
learned than he ; Melanchthon probably excelled him in 
learning ; and many others, both before and after Luther, 
have surpassed him in point of attainments. It was never 
Luther's aim to acquire a reputation for learning, to promote 
the cause of science either as a whole or in its parts, or to 
supply the world with books. He was anything but an 
academic, a closet student, an author. Numerous though his 
printed works are, but few of them originated in a proclivity 
for authorship ; the greater part were products of an agitated 
life, evidences of the Eeformer's conflicts, depositions of his 
spoken words, or children of the moment. For literary fame, 
in the pursuit of which so many sacrifice repose and health, 
this son of a miner cared nothing. To Wolfgang Capito, who 
had possibly advised him to publish his works, he wrote ^ (9th 
• Dk Wette, v. No. 1773. 

REVIEW OF Luther's character. 259 

July 1537) that he troubled himself very little about anything 
of that sort, and that, in fact, he was frequently attacked by 
a Saturnine hunger, which tempted him to devour his entire 
brood. To his tractate against Erasmus {De servo arbitrio) 
and his Catechism he did attach some little importance, and 
commissioned Caspar Cruciger to see if anything could be 
done with them (in a literary point of view). In the year 
1539 the first volume of his German writings appeared, in 
the preface to which occurs the following : — " I should have 
been willing if my books had for ever remained in obscurity 
and perished, for the Holy Scriptures are already too much 
forgotten and abandoned for the books of men." 

Or is it acuteness of perception, or inventive genius, that 
we admire in Luther ? He was the inventor of neither gun- 
powder nor printing, nor did he discover a fresh path across 
the waters, or a new quarter of the globe, like Columbus and 
Vasco de Gama. His telescope searched out no hidden star 
in the heavens ; his microscope descried no previously unknown 
plant or insect on the earth ; no law of mechanics or physics 
is called by his name. 

May we, then, behold in him the thinker who, in the 
invisible realm of the intellect, opened new paths for specula- 
tion or led the way to new views of supersensual matters ? 
This last he certainly did, after his own fashion, without 
intending it. But philosophical thought, research, investigation, 
as such, was not his business. If the name of philosopher had 
been applied to him, he would have protested against it. We 
know in what estimation he held the " old storm-brewer," 
Eeason, and her priestess, Philosophy, and what opinion he 
entertained of that master of thought, Aristotle ; and Luther, 
judging thus, must be content if the wisdom of this world pass 
him by unheeded, and if the history of philosophy omit to 
mention him or notice him only as a psychological problem. 
If, however, he was not a theoretical philosopher, was he not 
a philosopher by practice — a genuine sage ? Ask Luther 
himself whether he would have applied to himself the predicate 


of the Wise, bestowed by history upon his gracious elector. 
If the wise man be distinguished by a judicious moderation in 
all things, by a clever calculation of the means whereby he 
endeavours to attain his purpose, by a uniform morality that 
might serve as a rule of conduct for others, no person will 
think of classing Luther with the wise men presented to our 
view in Hellenic antiquity or modern history. Luther did 
and said and wrote many things that might perplex a wise 
man. His speech and action were anything but in all points 
morally correct. He gave himself much liberty in jest and 
earnest, and in neither department will his words bear to be 
weighed by the goldsmith's scales. He is far removed from 
the perfectness of that man who offends in no word (Jas. 
iii. 2). Though many of his expressions which are displeasing 
to our ears cannot be condemned as immoral, yet they strike 
us as in a high degree unmannerly, unchaste, and rude. 
Whenever Luther is carried away by passion, the unmanner- 
liness of which we speak actually lapses into immorality, 
inasmuch as a want of moderation constitutes a transgression 
of the bounds of morality. And yet, as truly moral, in the 
highest and noblest sense of the term, how far his colossal 
form towers above all the correct people of the mediocre class 
of morality — people who walk scrupulously and irreproachably 
along the beaten track of an inculcated virtue, in the polished 
surface of which they are reflected as in a mirror. It will 
perhaps be affirmed that the religious element outweighed the 
moral in his character, that he acted more from the promptings 
of pious impulses and moods than in accordance with moral 
principles which he had previously weighed and established. 
There is some truth in this statement. But while Luther did 
not pretend to be a model of morality in the sense which the 
wisdom of this world attaches to that expression, neither did 
he make any pretensions to saintship in the sense of the old 
Catholic Church or of modern Pietism. There was a time in 
his life when he did desire to be a saint, but that period lies 
far behind the time with which we are now concerned, and 

EEViEW OF Luther's character. 261 

that desire had long been overcome. The Luther in the cell 
at Erfurt, or on the staircase at Home, is not the Luther 
whom we are at present discussing. All self-elected devout- 
ness, all affectation of pious feelings, all self-tormentings of a 
gloomy asceticism, all monkery and all bigotry, were repugnant 
to his soul. He regarded such things as temptations of the 
devil, and did not hesitate to snap his fingers at the latter by 
indulging in a mirthfulness which was sometimes extravagant.^ 
In this respect also he claims not to be a pattern for others. 
When he confesses that he is a poor sinner, and can frequently 
not find words sufficient to express his unworthiness in the 
sight of God, there is no pretence or affectation in his 
language ; it is the sincere outpouring of the heart, free from 
all taint of hypocrisy or Pharisaism. It is this quality of 
manifest sincerity in Luther which wins for him the hearts 
even of men who are in the habit of regarding the language 
of the devout with suspicion. 

The Eoman Catholic Church has charged against Luther 
and the rest of the Eeformers, among other things, the fact 
that they performed no miracles in proof of their mission ; 
Luther, it has been declared, was not able to restore even a 
dead dog to life. Such charges could only provoke a smile 
from the Eeformer. Aside from the fact that the renowned 
miracles of saints wiU scarcely bear the light of criticism, 
Luther attached no particular value to those miracles which 
it is customary to designate as special. In his eyes, every- 
thing was one great miracle of the goodness and omnipotence 
of God. " Special " miracles, he maintained, should point us 

• Thus he advises Jonas von Stockhausen to combat his melancholy by saying 
to the devil : * ' Now then, devil, do not importune me. I cannot attend to 
your suggestions at present ; I must ride, drive, eat, drink, or do thus and so ; 
item : I must be merry now ; come again to-morrow," etc. And to Joachim von 
Anhalt he writes in a similar strain : "I, who have spent my life in mourning 
and looking gloomy, now seek and take pleasure when I can. ... It is true 
that pleasure in sin is of the devil, but pleasure in company with good, pious 
people, in the fear of God, in chastity and honour, though there may be a word 
or a jest too many, pleases God well " (De Wette, iv. Nos. 1488 and 1589). 
See also various consolatory epistles to Jerome Weller (Nos. 1227-1278, etc.). 


to the " daily miracles of the wide world." The former he 
compared to the apples and nuts with which children are 
bribed. In holding these opinions, however, he did not 
presume to set bounds to the divine omnipotence, saying to 
God, " Thus far dost Thou go, and no farther." We know 
what confidence he reposed in prayer ; and if any miracle is 
related of him, it is that miracle of prayer performed by the 
bedside of Melanchthon. Even in this connection, however, 
Luther lays no claim to the character of a miracle worker, and, 
as we have elsewhere observed, the occurrence should not be 
made use of to pamper the taste of miracle seekers. 

Since, then, none of the categories which we have mentioned 

will serve as a frame to our picture of Luther, — since it is 

neither the man of learning, nor the philosopher, nor the sage, 

nor the saint, that we revere in him, — in our effort to classify 

him we must perhaps have recourse to the word genius, a 

convenient category which we are wont to employ whenever 

our ordinary standard for the measurement of greatness is 

insufficient. And it is, in truth, the presence of genius which 

impresses us when we contemplate the character of Luther. 

In whatever sphere of life we meet him, on whatever side we 

view him, flashes of intellect scintillate from him. His style 

may in some instances be ponderous, but he never becomes 

tedious. We are invariably refreshed if we read aught that 

has flowed from his pen, or hear any anecdote concerning him. 

The most unimportant things are handled by him, in his letters, 

in such a manner as to awaken our interest. We become 

interested in every individual who has once come in contact 

with Luther. And with what numbers in all ranks and 

classes of society was he brought into contact ! Does not the 

peculiar charm of men of genius consist in the fact that they 

draw about them such a circle of acquaintances, who reflect 

something of their own brilliancy ? 

But now arises the further question as to what was the 
particular bent of Luther's genius. It will, perhaps, be said 
that his was a thoroughly j90ci!zc nature. And this is true. It 

EEviEw OF Luther's character. 263 

is not, however, to Luther as a poet that our thoughts fly as 
quickly as his name is mentioned. Some of his devotional 
songs — for instance, that powerful hymn, Ein' feste Burg ist 
unser Gott, etc. — live, it is true, not only in the Church, but 
(it is so, at least, with the one that we have mentioned) in the 
nation. But of independent poetical productions, of artistic 
creations in the service of art, Luther neither was nor cared 
to be the author. Profoundly poetical as his whole nature 
was, as is manifest from his charming mingling of jest and 
earnest, the like of which is to be met with in no other man 
except Shakespeare, Luther was called to something else than 
poetry — we may with propriety say, to something higher. The 
poetical vein in his composition was ever in the service of the 
Eeformer. Yet even as a poet, how superior Luther is to the 
other poets of his time, who either studied in Latin verses, 
imitated the ancient classics, or, in the broad and easy style 
of Hans Sachs, practised the master-song, giving birth to 
productions that were naively entertaining, but destitute of all 
elevation of sentiment. That which gives elevation to the 
poetry of Luther is, again, the religious element in his character. 
The Holy Scriptures were the source whence he drew inspira- 
tion as a poet, as well as in other capacities. The Psalms 
served as a model for his poetry and for the poetry of the 
Evangelical Church in general, whose leader in sacred song 
Luther is. We have already spoken of the influence which 
the translation of the Bible into the German vernacular exerted 
over the Eeformer's prose and over German prose generally. 
It is, then, a genius ijresided over hy religion and supported by 
a German spirit and nature, which so peculiarly affects us as 
we gaze upon Luther. He is the man of faith and the German, 
the man of the German people. The two characteristics are 
inseparably intertwined. If we remove Luther from the 
national soil upon which he stands, and behold in him only 
the possessor of a piety which, however earnest it may be, is 
a mere abstract quality, we are as far from having the entire 
Luther as though we were to strip from him his religious 


character and regard him only as a German. What sort of 
Gernjanity, after all, is that in which a pious heart throbs not ? 
Divest Luther's character of either its religious or its national 
impress, and the man becomes but a lifeless mask and his 
whole history a falsehood. Nay, it is not any abstract greatness 
that we reverence in Luther ; it is Luther himself in his whole 
essence, in his complete and solid personality, before whom 
we involuntarily bare our heads, as did the thousands who 
witnessed the unveiling of the bronze statue of the Reformer 
at Worms, in 1868. Far be it from us, however, to worship 
Luther. To him, as to other great men, the proverb is applic- 
able which declares that God has taken care that the trees 
shall not grow up to the sky. There are many shades as well 
as lights in his character, and the same quality that on some 
occasions seems to be a virtue, at other times assumes the 
aspect of a weakness.^ His humility is not infrequently 
(though perhaps unconsciously to the Eeformer) transformed 
into spiritual pride, his firmness becomes obstinacy, and his 
zeal for the faith develops into a passionateness which is 
well-nigh narrow-minded. Thus it was in the sacramental 
controversy. Moreover, the natural man, with his failings, 
ever and anon asserts himself in opposition to the new man, 
put on by Luther in faith, and so wonderfully glorified in 
the light of grace. Something of the peasant clung to 
the Eeformer throughout his life, and he also retained some 
of his earlier monkish characteristics. The flaming sword of 
Gideon, with which, as the warrior of God, he struck terror to 

' The polarity of his nature is well set forth by Hase, Kircheng. (9th ed.), 
p. 407 : "The revolution of the times, at the head of which he had his station, 
was reflected, as a sharp antithesis, in his life. He regarded the pope (at 
different periods of his life) as the most holy and the most hellish father. In his 
passionate excitement, his feelings underwent some stormy changes. The concern 
of his life was the liberation of the spirit, and ho contended zealously for the 
letter. He broke with history and (■x]>ressed himself contemptuously in regard to 
the fathers of the Church, and yet took his stand upon ecclesiastical tradition. 
With his fulness of faith in Christ, he set himself above the Holy Scriptures, and 
nevertheless issued the command to throttle Keason. He opposed the storm of the 
revolution, trusting solely in the power of the Spirit, and occasionally recom- 
mended the drowning of the pope and his servants in the Tyrrhenian Sea," etc. 

REVIEW OF Luther's character. 265 

the hearts of his enemies, changes before we are aware into the 
stout cudgel of the Thuringian peasant ; his mighty pen trans- 
forms itself into the flail of the countryman. There is but a 
step from the pathetic to the comic, and Luther at times, in his 
polemical writings, verges upon the comic, so that we are obliged 
to guard against being infected by the ingenious coarseness of 
his tone, which exerts an involuntary charm over our risibles. 
Notwithstanding all this, however, we cannot be angry with 
Luther, even when he gives way to anger. A certain true- 
heartedness and honesty underlie his very storming and 
blustering, and we become reconciled to him before our vexa- 
tion has time to express itself. On serious reflection, however, 
we may well be conscious of a feeling of sadness that the high 
and glorious nature of the man contains elements which are 
so contradictory, and which his ill-wishers can so readily 
combine into a caricature. We must also express the further 
regret that Luther's dislike to Zwingle, which in the year 
1537 seemed to be weakening, soon returned in full force, so 
that Luther carried his enmity against the Swiss Reformer and 
his adherents down to the grave.^ 

^ In his trccatise on the Councils, written in 1539, he made occasion, in 
speaking of the Nestorians, to class Zwingle among their number. Upon this 
the Zurichers wrote to him, admonishing him to keep the peace. Luther did 
not answer their letter, but kept himself quiet for a time. In 1542, however, 
he published his Vermahnung zum Gebet vnder die Tilrlen, in which, accord- 
ing to his custom, he classed Zwingle with Miinzer and his associates. The 
Zurichers refrained from noticing this afiront, in order that they might not 
break the peace. In Luther's letters, also, of the fifth decade of his century, 
we occasionally find the old attacks upon the Sacramentarians ; his joy over the 
Reformation of Cologne was seriously diminished by fear lest the Zwinglian 
element should there be represented (comp. De Wette, vol. v. Nos. 2146 and 
2252, where he even calls the mediator, Bucer, " a chatterer," p. 709). In 1543, 
Froschauer, a bookseller at Zurich, was kind enough to send Luther a copy of 
the Zurich translation of the Bible. Luther expressed his distaste for such 
presents in a manner which was not the most polite in the world. He thanked 
the sender, it is true (31st August, De Wette, vol. v. No. 2162), but added 
that the Church of God could have no fellowship with the preachers of Zurich, 
who had been sufficiently admonished to renounce their error, etc. He would 
not, he declared, become a partaker in their condemnation and their blasphemous 
doctrine, but would pray and teach against them to the end. The judgment 
which had fallen upon Zwingle would, he predicted, overtake the rest of the 
preachers. Gualter, Zwingle's son-in-law, thereupon published the WTitings of 


Luther had besought God that he might not live to behold 
the terrible outbreak of a religious war in Germany. He gave 
an entertainment to his friends on St. Martin's Day, 1545, on 
which occasion he expressed himself as follows : — " So long as 
I live, no danger, please God, will arise, and there will be a 
continuance of peace in Germany. But when I die, then pray. 
There will truly be need of prayer ; and our children will be 
obliged to lay hold on their spears, and there will be sad times 
in Germany. Therefore, I say, ' Be diligent in prayer after 
my death.' " Only too soon did it become necessary to have 
recourse to the spear. After every endeavour to preserve 
peace had been exhausted, and the last religious conference at 
Regensburg had proved of no avail, the Diet went into session 
at the same city, in June 1546. But few princes were 
personally present on this occasion. The Schmalkaldic Allies 

Zwingle, together with a defence of liis character. In the Commentanj on 
Genesis, Luther poured forth fresh invectives. Finally, he wrote his Kurzes 
Bekenntniss vom heilijen Sacrament, in which he expressed regret for his former 
leniency. The Zurichers now felt constrained to defend themselves, which they 
did in the Orthodoxa Tigurince eccleske ministrorum confessio, 1545. In 
reference to this publication, Luther wrote to James Probst, at Bremen (17th 
January 1546, De Wette, vol. v. No. 2310), that he had been wishing tlie 
Zurichers to write against him with violence, in order that their animosity 
towards him might be made manifest. He even proceeded to 'parody the first 
Psalm, as follows: "Blessed is he who walketh not in the counsel of the secta- 
rians, nor standeth in the way of the Zwinglians, nor sitteth in the seat of the 
Zurichers." He wrote this shortly before his journey to Eisleben. How far, 
therefore, there is foundation for the story which relates that before this last 
journey Luther said to Melanchthon, " I confess that there has been too much 
controversy on tlie subject of the sacrament," and even represents the Reformer 
as commissioning Melanchthon to write a conciliatory tractate to the same effect, 
we will not attempt to decide. The story is certainly supported by good 
authorities. Even if it be true, however, it would, as Ebrard justly renu\rks 
(in das Dogma vom heil. Ahendmahl, p. 483), contain no recantation of doctrine 
on the part of Luther, but would be simply a confession that he had been too 
passionate as a polemic. But even this is improbable, since the very last sermons 
which Luther jjreached shortly before his death, at Halle and Eisleben, contain 
severe attacks upon the "desecrators of the sacrament." "Wo can scarcely 
bring ourselves to assume, with Ebrard, that Luther made use of the expres- 
sion above cited previous to an earlier journey to Eisleben (in 1539), and that 
the remark was erroneously referred to his last journey. The fact is, however, 
that Luther was one of those great men whose utterances cannot be calculated 
upon with certainty. His moods were not always equal, unyielding though he 
jirovud himself when some doctrine which he had once embraced was assailed. 


sent their deputies, who laid before the Diet a paper con- 
taining a petition for the ratification of peace and a protest 
against the Council at Trent. This application was scornfully 
rejected. On account of the scanty attendance at the Diet, 
nothing was effected, a decision being postponed until the 
following February. The emperor, meantime, had issued 
orders for the recruiting of his troops, a process which was 
going on, accordingly, as early as in June. On being ques- 
tioned concerning his reasons for such a proceeding, Charles 
replied that he would be most gracious to the obedient states, 
but would deal with the disobedient ones in accordance with 
the law and his imperial authority. The emperor was exceed- 
ingly desirous to divest the war of the odious character of a 
war of religion, and to give it the appearance of an execu- 
tionary war against the enemies of the empire and of civil 
order. He sent letters to this effect to the cities of Strassburg, 
Nuremberg, Augsburg, and Ulm, and to Duke Ulric of Wurtem- 
berg. The Elector of Saxony instructed his envoy to leave 
the Diet secretly ; he commended the issue of the affair to 
God, who, he said, would doubtless order His own cause to 
the promotion of His glory. Landgrave Philip wrote to the 
elector that he had long foreseen the present turn of events, 
and expressed his chagrin that the Protestants should have 
waited and slept too long. The two leaders of the Alliance 
made trial of one more final measure, however. From Ichter- 
hausen, under date 4th July, they despatched a letter to the 
emperor, assuring him that they were unconscious of any act 
of disobedience towards him, and claiming their right to be 
heard before violent measures were resorted to against them. 
The emperor replied by pronouncing sentence of outlawry 
upon the leaders of the Alliance (20th July). In this 
particular, also, Charles avoided all reference to religion. It 
was entirely otherwise with the pope. He was anxious to 
have the war prosecuted as a religious war.^ He made pro- 

1 Besides Sleidan, the chief source of information concerning this war is still 
HoKTLEDER (died 1640), Von den Ursachen des deutschen Kriegs Karls V. 


clamation thereof in the old style, as a crusade against 
heretics, and of course promised copious indulgences to all 
who would take part in it. In imitation of Luther's forcible 
language, the Protestants called this bull " the dragon venom 
of the Eoman Antichrist." Nicholas Amsdorf published it 
with an introduction.^ At about the same time the pope 
addressed a brief to the Swiss, encouraging them to take part 
in this meritorious war. Among all the excellent deeds of the 
Confederates, this, he declared, would be the most excellent. 

The Protestants now collected their forces. The upland 
cities assembled under their general, Sebastian Schartlin of 
Burtenbach, an old soldier, who had served under Maximilian il. 
and had been present at the capture of Ptome. As heads of 
the Schmalkaldic Alliance, the Elector John Frederick of 
Saxony, and Landgrave Philip of Hesse, assumed the command 
of the Protestant forces. The troops of the Alliance amounted 
to 18,000 infantry soldiers and 9000 cavalry, and the army 
of the Uplanders was still more numerous. The sum total 
of the combined forces is estimated at 47,000.^ The imperial 
army was at first far smaller, being composed of 3000 
Spaniards, 5000 German foot soldiers, and 700 horsemen. 
The Papal auxiliaries had not then arrived, and the emperor, 
after vainly waiting for them at Eegensburg, retired to his 
secure quarters at Landshut. Had the leaders of the Alliance 
been united at this time, they would to all human appearance 
have won the victory. Schartlin had occupied the defile in 
the Tyrol through which the Italian auxiliaries were obliged 
to pass in order to join the emperor, and also purposed a 
visit to the dignitaries assembled at Trent ; he, however, 
found himself restricted in his operations by the council of 
war at Ulm, without whose sanction it was forbidden to pro- 

vndcr die Schmalkaldischen Bundesobersien, etc. Coinj). Jaiin, Geschkhte den 
Schmalkaldinchen Krieges, Leipsic, 1837; also Maiuieineke (iv.), and Kanke 
(iv. and v.). 

' Bulla desfjrossrM Ahlasses, wclche Paid III. zu diesem Zwj und Ausrcutun;/ 
der Lidherischen Ketzerei yegeben hat. 

* Marheineke, iv. p. 421. 


ceed. Between Schartlin and the landgrave the demon of 
jealousy was rampant. Schartlin accused Philip of not wish- 
ing to bite the fox, declaring that every ditch seemed too deep 
and every morass too wide for the landgrave to cross. Philip 
had quarrelled with the elector also. And thus in mutual 
displeasure, which paralyzed effort, the Protestants gave the 
emperor ample time to receive the hoped-for reinforcements. 
Under Ottavio Farnese, a nephew of the pope, an army of 
12,900 Italians marched to the support of Charles, being 
further augmented in its passage by a considerable number of 
German lanzknechts. Of this body Duke Alba had com- 
mand. The hostile armies were stationed opposite each other 
in the vicinity of Ingolstadt ; but before any engagement took 
place, the allied troops found it necessary to retire, as even 
their pecuniary supplies were exhausted. 

Affairs now took an unexpected turn. 

Duke Maurice of Saxony, son-in-law to the landgrave, had 
succeeded his father Henry in the government of the dukedom. 
Maurice was a Protestant, but not a member of the Schmal- 
kaldic Alliance, nor was he favourably disposed towards his 
cousin, the Elector John Frederick. Prior to the time of 
which we speak, he had waged a petty war against him with 
reference to the town of Wurzen,^ and he had now entered 
the emperor's service, after concluding a treaty with Charles, 
according to the conditions of which he was to assist in the 
war against the members of the League, while still retaining 
his own religious liberty. He had also promised to submit 
himself to the decrees of the council in like manner with 
other princes, and to introduce no innovations in religious 
matters. He now regarded himself as commissioned by the 
emperor to execute the sentence of outlawry pronounced 
upon the elector, and accordingly invaded the dominions of 
the latter, under the pretext that it would be better for the 
elector to fall into his hands than into those of King Ferdi- 

1 This war, on account of its taking place at tlic Easter season, at the time of 
the Easter cakes, was called the Pancake War [Flack-n krieg]. 


nand, who was ready to march into Saxony from Bohemia. 
When the elector received the alarming intelligence of the 
invasion of his land, he abandoned everything else for the 
pui-pose of protecting his own possessions, which, with the 
exception of the three strong cities of Wittenberg, Gotha, and 
Eisenach, were already in Maurice's power. As soon, however, 
as the elector appeared, all his people flocked around him, and 
he found it easy to recapture all that Maurice had seized. He 
even entered the domains of his opponent, and left him only 
the cities of Dresden and Leipsic. But at this juncture the 
emperor advanced into Saxony from the direction of Bohemia. 
The elector, who would scarcely credit the report of this sudden 
appearance of Charles, retired to the city of Miihlberg, on the 
Elbe, believing himself to be fully protected by the river. 
The Spaniards, however, paid no regard to the rolling waters, 
but, holding their sabres betw^een their teeth, plunged into the 
flood and swam across. The rest of the army, not caring to 
emulate the intrepidity of the Spanish soldiers, was conducted 
by a young peasant to shallow places in the Elbe, where the 
river was easily fordable. A battle was then forced upon 
the elector on the heath of Lochau. His people fought 
heroically, but were obliged, nevertheless, to succumb to 
the military art of Alba. Long after the elector had seen 
his cavalry put to flight, and the lines of the infantry every- 
where broken, he continued his personal resistance, but at 
length surrendered himself as a prisoner of war on the 
24th of April 1547. When led away to be presented to 
the emperor, he exclaimed, " Lord God, have mercy on me ; 
here I am ! " 

Soon after the capture of the elector, the emperor appeared 
before Wittenberg, which city still continued its valiant 
defence, having been in a state of siege since October 1546. 
In the spirit of Luther, Bugenhagen there encouraged the 
people in prayer and stedfastness.^ Over the fresh grave of 

' Bugenhagen himself described these days of tribulation in his book, entitled, 
Wie es uns zu Wittenbenj in der Stadt (jeyaiKjen ist in diesem vergawjenen 


the departed Eeformer, the citizens sang, with a heartiness that 
they had never known before, Ein' festc Burg ist unser Gott. 
The faithful shepherd of this smitten flock himself needed the 
support of prayer for his own heart's strengthening. As he 
himself relates, he was repeatedly tempted by the devil to 
leave the city, which he had sufficient opportunities of doing ; 
but faith ever prevailed over the temptation offered to the flesh. 
It was the same with the other preachers ; one was strengthened 
by the courage of another. A similar spirit was exhibited by 
the schoolmasters, one of whom, on being asked whether 
he and his comrades were willing to remain in the city, 
answered for himself and for all : " Ay, and though we should 
die for it, we will gladly remain by the grave of our dear 
father, Doctor Martin Luther." Bugenhagen sent away his 
wife and children when the tidings of the emperor's arrival 
were received, and for six weeks he knew nothing of them. 
He prayed to God during this time as follows : " My wife and 
children are gone, my house and property are no longer in 
my possession, I myself am in the jaws of death ; this poor 
city and church are in danger; our school" [University] "is in 
disorder ; my dear brethren and friends in this land have been 
spoiled by fire, robbery, and murder ; our beloved prince and 
master is in captivity, and has lost his territories and his 
subjects. ' The Lord gave, the Lord hath taken away,' as Job 
said. Dear Father, let me add, ' And the Lord will restore all 
things.' Let me live, that after Thy wrath I may hear of and 
behold Thy goodness on the earth, that this city and church 
may be glad again ; that the University, the churches, and the 
schools, together with this ruined land, may be lifted up 
again ; that our children and posterity may once more cleave 
to the precious gospel ; that the word of our salvation may 

Krieg bis imr diirch Gottes Gnade erloset sind und unsere liohe Schule durch 
den durchlauchtigsten Fiirsten und Herrn, Herrn Moritzen, Herzogen zu 
Sachsen, u. s. w. wiederum aufgerichtet ist. Wahrhaftige Historie heschrieben 
durch Joh. Bugenhagen, Pommern, Doctor und Pfarherr zu Wittenberg. 
Geschrieben zu Wittenberg, 1547, den 3 August; gedruckt daselbst durch 
Veit Kreutzer. 40. 


have free course in the world. Then will I sing the Nunc 
dimittis ; then do Thou graciously take me away from this 
vale of misery, or, if it be Thy will to prolong my life, Thou 
wilt surely give me our daily bread. Should there be no 
room for me at Bethlehem in the inn. Thou wilt provide 
room enough for me in the stable and the manger, and wilt 
give me, in addition, ' peace and a thankful heart." On the 
Tuesday succeeding the Feast of St. Martin [11th November] 
1546, the suburbs of Wittenberg were burned down. When, 
on the following morning, a gentle rain fell on the very spot 
where the fire had raged, and a rainbow appeared, Bugenhagen 
descried in the occurrence an omen of peace, and embodied 
the idea in an edifying discourse. 

On Ascension Day, in the year 1547, the elector finally 
found himself compelled to surrender the city to the em- 
peror. The burghers entreated Bugenhagen to write to their 
lord and dissuade him from so doing, but Bugenhagen 
declined the commission, and assembled the people for prayer. 
The following formed a part of the petition offered by him 
on this occasion : — 

" Not knowing what to do in our distress, this alone remains 
to us, dear heavenly Father, to lift up our eyes unto Thee in 
heaven. All things on which men rely we have had in 
abundance, but we have been corrupted by these things, and 
in order that we should have no creature or work of man to 
put our trust in, Thou hast taken from us even our dear master 
the elector. We thank Thee, dear Father, that witli this 
fatherly^ chastisement Thou hast driven us to commit our- 
selves to Thy mercy in Christ Jesus, as in the first command- 
ment Thou requirest us to do. Thus, dear Father, Thou hast 
what Thou desirest of us. Deal graciously therefore with 
Thy poor children, and be present in Thy Holy Spirit with 
our elector and with us, and give us good counsel, that we 
may be delivered." At this point the people fell upon their 
knees and prayed so fervently, that all were convinced that 

' The above, and not " natural," is probably the true reading. 


the matter could not result disastrously after having been 
committed thus to the hand of God.^ 

The elector now himself advised the burghers to surrender 
the city. He could not, indeed, do otherwise, for the emperor 
had threatened him with death if he refused to surrender 
Wittenberg. In fact, the sentence of death had already been 
pronounced against him, though possibly this was merely a 
feint, employed for the purpose of alarming him. The elector 
received the intelligence of his doom as he was playing a game 
of chess with Duke Ernest of Brunswick. " I cannot believe," 
he exclaimed, " that the emperor means to treat me thus. If 
such, however, be the determination of his imperial majesty, 
I desire to be assured of the fact, in order that I may leave 
directions concerning my wife and my children." At the 
entreaty of Joachim, elector of Brandenburg, the life of the 
Elector of Saxony was spared ; but by the articles of capitula- 
tion to which he agreed, he was obliged to renounce the 
government of his domains, and to remain the prisoner of the 
emperor as long as the latter desired. Maurice received the 
territories of his cousin, only a few cities being left to their 
old master. 

The tidings of the elector's captivity had a most depressing 
effect upon the Landgrave Philip of Hesse. This prince 
relied upon the intercessory offices of his son-in-law Maurice 
and the Elector of Brandenburg, but the emperor insisted that 
Philip should surrender at discretion. The landgrave accord- 
ingly presented himself before the emperor at Halle. It had 
been designed that the scene which we are now about to 
describe should be one of great solemnity. Beneath a gilded 
canopy, in a splendidly decorated hall, his imperial majesty 
was seated, surrounded by the highest of the nobility and 
clergy. The landgrave was required to assume a kneeling 
posture before the throne, while his chancellor, standing by 
his side, read the humble apology of Philip. After the 
accomplishment of this ceremony in due form, Held, the 
^ See Vogt's Johann Bugenhagen, pp. 421 sqq. 


chancellor of Charles, conferred the imperial absolution. 
Various articles were next presented to the landgrave for 
liis signature. In religious matters he was required to submit 
to the decrees of the council ; to this, however, the landgrave 
assented only on condition that the council referred to should 
be a general, free. Christian council. The emperor, on the 
other hand, promised Philip to inflict neither corporal punish- 
ment nor perpetual imprisonment upon him.^ Before the 
landgrave was aware, however, he was taken prisoner at the- 
hotel of Duke Alba, whither he had been invited to an enter- 
tainment, and, as we shall see, a considerable time elapsed 
before he was released. 

The Schmalkaldic League was now annihilated, and with its 
destruction the purposes of the emperor were for once accom- 
plished. In honour of the victory thus gained, Charles caused 
some medals to be struck off, bearing the image of a parted 
rope and the fall of the Titans from heaven to earth. Abject 
apologies were offered by almost all the members of the league 
in Upper Germany, and fines were paid by them. It is painful 
to see how one Swabian city after another — Bopfingen, Nord- 
lingen, Dinkelsbiihl, and all the rest of them — crawled to the 
victor's feet and concluded a separate peace with the emperor, 
acting upon the principle that " every fox must look out for 
his own brush." 

Bitter, as was to be expected, was the fate of the Elector 
Hermann of Cologne. He was degraded from his office. The 

^ Up to our own time it has been inaintained that the original text of the 
imperial covenant read "any" imprisonment [ebiig instead of ewi(j\ It is 
asserted that the emperor's promise was thus communicated to the landgrave, 
that the word einUj was afterwards altered into exci(j, and that in this 
manner Philip was imposed upon by a gross falsification. Since the recent 
discovery of documents in which ewi(j appears as the original text, this 
suspicion must undoubtedly be abandoned. The emperor's conduct was 
perfidious, nevertheless ; for what, after all, is the meaning of perpetual 
imprisonment? The landgrave's imprisonment must soon have appeared per- 
petual to him, for he was dragged from one captivity to another. This 
"vindication" of Charles' "honour" is, therefore, a very ju'ecurious one. 
See Heller's presentation of the document above mentioned in the Munchner 
jtolilische Blatter, Bd. 58, Heft ii., 1866. 


states and sul3jects of the archbishopric were, in tlie name of 
the emperor, released from their allegiance to him, and com- 
manded thenceforth to recognise Count Adolph of Schaumbiirg 
as their spiritual pastor-in-chief. Great was the joy of the 
fanatical clergy of Cologne at the execution of this sentence. 
The degraded elector retired to his family estates. 

Let us turn once more to Wittenberg. The emperor had 
promised that no foreigners, but only Germans, should compose 
tlie garrison stationed there. (The people of the city had 
chiefly feared the incoming of the Spaniards.) Charles kept 
his word. He also manifested great forbearance in all things 
pertaining to religion. He inspected the churches, and desired 
that the preaching should go on as usual while he was present. 
In Whitsun week Bugenhagen preached daily on the history 
of the festival, and fearlessly discussed the distinction between 
the faith of the Evangelicals and that of the pope. The 
emperor is said to have declared that he found things in these 
lands very different from the representations which had been 
made to him. We are all familiar with the anecdote which 
relates that, when on a visit to the castle church, the emperor 
being advised by Alba to have the bones of the arch-heretic 
Luther disinterred and burned, Charles replied that he waged 
war with the living, and not with the dead. The imperial 
troops remained in the city for a fortnight. After their 
departure, Maurice took formal possession of Wittenberg, and 
received the homage of the council and the rest of the 
inhabitants, assuring to them their ancient privileges and 
rights. The Wittenbergers generally, not excepting Bugen- 
hagen, soon became reconciled to the change in the govern- 
ment. A certain number of faithful ones, who were still 
unwilling to abandon their old sovereign, were much displeased 
with Bugenhagen for acquiescing in the rule of Maurice, and 
accused him of hypocrisy toAvards the emperor and of ingratitude 
to the captive elector. From this time forth it was no longer 
John Frederick, but Maurice, for whom the clergy were 
required to offer public prayer as the ruler of the land. 


Notwithstanding this, however, secret petitions, and even 
public prayers in the churches, for the former elector's speedy 
release from captivity, ceased not to ascend. On the 16th of 
July 1547, Maurice summoned the Wittenberg theologians to 
Leipsic, and assured them of his favourable intentions toward 
the University, declaring it to be his desire not to " diniinisli 
but to increase " its prosperity, and exhorting them to continue 
to proclaim the pure doctrines of the gospel. Hence they 
might be convinced that Maurice, though a political opponent 
of the Schmalkaldic League, was yet no apostate from the 
faith of the Protestants, as many accused him of being. 

In the meantime, the pope exerted every effort to counter- 
act the emperor's endeavours to secure peace. Under the 
pretext that the plague had broken out at Trent, he transferred 
the council to Bologna, for which place a few fathers took 
their departure in March 1547. The emperor, however, 
would hear nothing of a removal of the council, and even 
threatened to have the pope's legate thrown into the Etsch if 
he ventured to say anything more on the subject. He also 
declared null and void beforehand all which this Papal 
comicil should decree. With him sided the German bishops, 
while the Protestants could discern neither in Trent nor in 
Bologna a council in which they could place any confidence. 












THE League of Sclimalkalden was annihilated, but 
Protestantism as a conviction continued to subsist in 
the hearts of its friends ; and though much that had already 
been gained for the cause was now lost, the confidence of the 
Evangelicals in the ultimate victory of truth remained 
unchanged. We have just seen that in the very midst of the 
hardships of war, the courage of believers waxed stronger. As 
for the emperor, he appeared to have no thought of subjugat- 
ing the consciences of his subjects, or waging a war of religion 
against those whose belief differed from his own. If he ever 
manifested tolerance towards those of a different faith, it was 
at the time of which we speak, and he still cherished the idea 
that he would be able to bring about a final agreement on 
religious questions. To this his constant purpose he trusted 
that the "armed" Diet at Augsburg, held in July 1547, 
would be subservient. The epithet " armed " was applied to 
this Diet because the emperor had stationed his troops 
in the vicinity. Within the assembly, however, armour 


was laid aside, the topics there discussed being of a spiritual 
nature relating chiefly to the sacred matter of conviction. 
Whether or not the emperor was in earnest (Calvin always 
called him " the fox "), he at least took great pains to foster 
the belief that his war against the members of the Schmal- 
kaldic League had had nothing to do with religion. And, 
indeed, immediately after his victory, vigorous as were his 
proceedings against the insurgent heads of the league, he 
treated the Protestants as such with leniency, giving them 
liberty in the matter of divine worship, and thereby 
exciting their amazement. Another effort to arrive at an 
understanding in regard to matters of faith was now in con- 
templation. The emperor, being at the helm on this occasion, 
chose as peace mediators men of whom he entertained the 
hope that they would avoid extremes, so far as that was 
practicable, and find a just medium between the t\vo channels 
of belief. Of those deeper needs of faith which will not 
suffer themselves to be abrogated by a diplomatic pen-stroke, 
he had, indeed, no conception. He had honoured with his 
confidence three learned men, two of wliom belonged to the 
Eomish, and one to the Evangelical party. The former two 
were Julius von Pflug, the same who had at one time been 
ousted from the bishopric of Naumburg, but who was now 
reinstated in that see, and Michael Helding, suffragan-bishop 
of Mentz and bishop {in 2^ttrtibus) of Sidon, hence called 
Sidonius; the Protestant was John Agricola of Eisleben, at 
the period of which we speak court preacher to the Elector 
of Brandenburg. Luther called this man " Master Grickel." 
All that we know of him points to the conclusion that he was 
a man of talent and a gifted preacher, not destitute of dogmatic 
obstinacy, which he evinced by seeking to out-Luther Luther 
in reference to the doctrine of law. In the present discus- 
sion, however, he manifested so much pliancy and submission 
to the will of the emperor as to occasion a mistaken estimate of 
his character on the part of many. These three men prepared 
an ecclesiastical constitution, which was legalized by the 


emperor on the 15th of May 1548, and which, on account 
of its provisory character, was entitled an " Interim." To 
distinguish it from the Eegensburg Interim (of 1541), it 
was called the Augsburg or Second Interim. It consisted of 
twenty-six articles. The doctrine of justification by faith, 
which Luther had guarded as the apple of his eye, was here 
diluted to the least possible degree ; the doctrine of the 
church was cast in as Catholic a mould as possible (the 
interpretation of Scripture being made dependent upon its 
authority) ; the primacy of Peter, and consequently of the 
pope, was recognised (conditioned, it is true, upon the truly 
Christian character of the individual pope) ; the doctrine of 
the seven sacraments was restored ; and the intercession of 
saints, and even the sacrifice of the mass, with all its depen- 
dencies, together with extreme unction, were established in 
this interim. What, then, remained to the Protestants ? 
The provisional allowance of the marriage of priests until the 
council should render its decision in the matter, and the 
privilege of partaking of the Lord's Supper in both kinds — 
the doctrine of concomitancy being here maintained. Truly, 
Master Grickel uttered an empty boast when he declared 
that he had " opened a great wide window to the gospel ; he 
had reformed the pope, converted the emperor and made a 
Lutheran of him, and now the golden age would come, when the 
gospel should be preached in every bishop's land and through- 
out all Europe." And how grossly did he deceive himself 
when he affirmed that Luther would have lived ten years 
longer from joy at such a victory.^ 

After the reading of the interim before the Diet, the 
Elector (Archbishop) of Mentz arose and thanked the emperor 
for it in the name of the other states, although he had received 
no commission empowering him thus to act. On the contrary, 
much dissatisfaction was manifested on both sides. Margrave 
John of Brandenburg and the Count-Palatine Wolfgang von 
Zweibrllcken immediately declared themselves opposed to the 

^ SOUCHAY, I.e. p. 451. 


interim. ^Maurice was also displeased with it, and withdrew 
from the Diet after he had communicated his objections to the 
emperor. John Frederick, in liis captivity, protested against 
the interim, and ceased not his protestations though they in- 
creased the rigour of his imprisonment. He was deprived of his 
only comfort, the Holy Scriptures and the religious hooks with 
which he refreshed himself. Still he remained stedfast. The 
books, he said, might be taken away from him, but no one 
could tear from his heart what he had received therein from 
the Holy Scriptures. More pliancy was shown — at certain 
moments, at least — by Landgrave Philip, who wrote to his son 
that to hear mass was, after all, better than to play cards, or to 
sacrifice to Bacchus or Venus, and that ceremonies were, in any 
case, not so very important,^ 

The interim met with no kindly reception from the Hessian 
jrreachers, however. The imperial cities of Germany like- 
wise declared themselves opposed to the same. AVhen 
Granvella intimated to the deputies from Strassburg that 
there existed means of reducing disobedient states to obedi- 
ence, tliey replied that it was possible to burn a man 
to death, but that no one could be forced into believing 
at the dictation of another. The North German cities of 
Lubeck, Hamburg, Bremen, Liineburg, and Magdeburg also 
stedfastly opposed the interim. Duke Ulric of Wurtemberg 
and the Elector of the Palatinate submitted. Not so the 
theologians of Wurtemberg. Brenz resisted manfully at Halle. 
On the arrival of the victorious emperor at Halle in December 
of the year 1546, the papers of this Evangelical minister had 
fallen into the liands of the imperial party, and Brenz had 
been obliged to take refuge in flight. At first he retreated to 
a lofty tower of the city, and afterwards, when no longer 
secure in that hiding-place, he concealed himself in the fields 
and woods in the bitter cold of winter. He was finally 
recalled by the council, but only to be exposed to fresh 

^ A communication to the same purport, which he is said to have addressed 
to tlie ernperor, has been dechired a forgery. 


persecutions wlien the interim demanded a decision. Brenz 
formed his decision. He called the interim the Interitus 
(downfall), and declared that the emperor had been most 
outrageously deceived. To assent to the interim, he averred, 
would be to serve two masters of contrary minds. These plain- 
spoken declarations were, however, not unobserved. Granvella 
demanded that the bold preacher should be delivered over to 
justice, and attempts were made to arrest him, but, warned 
in time, he fled to Basel/ where he was kindly received by 
Grynseus. In the meantime, his family was exiled, and a 
price was set on his own head. At Basel the sorely-tried 
man was apprised of the death of his wife. After undergoing 
a variety of fortunes,^ he was called, subsequent to the 
abolition of the interim, to Stuttgart, in the spring of 1553, 
and there contributed not a little to the establishment of 
the ecclesiastical constitution. He remained in the last- 
mentioned city until his death, which occurred on the 11th 
of September 1570. 

Erhard Schnepff also, professor at Tubingen, was ousted 
from his position in consequence of the interim. On the 
11th of I^^ovember 1548, after the mass had been re-estab- 
lished in Tubingen, he preached his farewell sermon, which 
drew tears from many of his auditors. Fifty-one other persons 
who held office in the city and its vicinity, having refused 
their assent to the interim, were discharged on the same day.' 
The entire number of clergymen in Upper Germany who were 

^ A note received by him from some friend in the council chamber con- 
tained the following words : — Fuge, Br-enti, cito, citius, citissime. Concerning 
his reception at Basel and the somewhat frugal hospitiility extended to him on 
the part of the University, see Cast's Tag'ebuch, p. 79. The city of Basel had 
no desire to incur the ill-will of the emperor, and therefore forbade the printing 
of any attack upon the interim. 

^ He lived for a time under an assumed name in the Castle of Hornburg, in 
the Black Forest, and afterwards removed to Urach and, later, to Sindelfingen. 
Amid the perturbations of the life which he now led, he married a second time. 
1 n connection with ten theologians of AVurtemberg, he subsequently published 
tlie Confessio Wurtembergka, which was approved by Melanchthon and the Saxon 
theologians generally. See Hartmann, I.e. 

^ Hautmann, Erhard Schnepff, Tiibingen, 1870, p. 68. 

282 HISTORY OF the reformation. 

dismissed from their charges on account of the interim is 
estimated to have been four hundred. Some of the clergy 
thus displaced experienced brutal usage. Martin Frecht, of 
Ulm, and a number of other preachers who refused to submit 
to the interim, " were placed in irons by the provost, and thus 
miserably conducted to Speier."^ Opposition was encountered 
in the Ehenish provinces likewise. A preacher residing in 
that part of the empire, who had been driven by fear of man 
to assent to the interim, afterwards experienced such remorse 
for the act tliat he committed suicide in despair."^ 

But the interim excited opposition not only on the side 
of the Protestants, but also from the Catholic party. Few 
as were the concessions made to the Protestants in the 
instrument to which we refer, they still were concessions 
in which Ultramontanism could not acquiesce. Cardinal 
Sfondrati, to whom the emperor had caused a copy of the 
document to be sent, protested especially against the con- 
templated allowance of the marriage of priests. It struck 
him as an unheard-of tiling that a consecrated priest should 
be the husband of any woman. Nor was he more willing to 
concede the cup to the laity. He considered that his imperial 
majesty had been guilty of unwarrantable presumption in 
offering an independent decision concerning ecclesiastical 
matters. Even the Archbishop of Mentz, who had so pre- 
maturely returned thanks to the emperor in the name of the 
states, was now among the opponents of the interim. Cardinal 
Farnese, at Eome, discovered six or eight heresies in the 
imperial instrument, and regarded the issue thereof as an 
encroachment upon the rights of the pope. It was satirized 
1)y the popular wit in stanzas like the following : — 

" Hut'-dicli vor dein Interim, 
Es lauert ein Sclialk hinter ihni." ' 

1 Thus Melanchthon informs King Christian of Denmark, September 154S 
{Corp. Ref. vii. p. 131. Comp. also some of the following letters). 

2 Corp. Ref. p. 164. 

3 [Of the interim Ijeware, 

For a knave's in ambush there.] 


And some learned investigator discovered that, by a trans- 
position of the letters composing the word, interim might be 
converted into mentiri (to lie). Satirical medals (interim 
dollars) were likewise struck off. 

In the midst of these disturbances, Maurice, through the 
summer and part of the winter of 1548, held several diets 
and conventions, which were attended by his theologians. 
These assemblies met at Meissen, Pegau, Torgau, Zelle, 
Jiiterbogk, and finally, toward the close of the year, at Leipsic. 
In the latter city, before the termination of the year, he 
ordered the composition of a formula, which, to distinguish it 
from the interims of Eegensburg and Augsburg, is called the 
Leipsic Interim, and also the New or Third Interim. This 
treated less of the tenets of faith than of the usages of divine 
worship, in reference to which latter a return to many of the 
ancient practices was recommended. For our comfort be it 
observed, that the practices which were to be resumed had 
no bearing upon faith, but were simply indifferent things 
(Adiaphora) — such, for instance, as the use of the cope, 
of lights upon the altar, and similar liturgical additions. It 
w^as also ordered that Friday and Saturday should again be 
observed as fast-days, this fasting being recommended not as 
a meritorious work, or a part of the service of God, but " as a 
secular institution and regulation." These external matters 
were, however, not the only ones concerned. In the dogmatical 
teachings of the interim — in the doctrine of justification, for 
example — there was manifested an ill-concealed accommodation 
to the Catholic apprehension ; and in this, as in the Augsburg 
Interim, the rites of confirmation and extreme unction were 
admitted to the dignity of sacraments. With Paul Eber, 
John Bugenhagen, George Major, and John Pfefifinger, Philip 
Melanchthon was associated in the preparation of this interim 
— the man upon whom, after the death of Luther, the task of 
representing the cause of the latter seemed chiefly to devolve. 
Can it be wondered at that many regarded this pliancy of 
Melanchthon's as more than weakness — that they beheld in it 


a betrayal of the sacred cause ? An action that might be 
comprehended and pardoned in an Agricola, could not be 
allowed to pass uncensured when performed by the Teacher 
of Germany. As long as Luther lived, Melanchthon, though 
often with inward repugnance, had yielded to his superior 
force of will,^ and had kept silence while Luther stormed and 
raved ; but Luther in return had had patience with the 
weaknesses of Melanchthon, and had protected his friend as 
much as possible from the attacks of others. The recollection 
of the friendly relation which subsisted between the two 
Eeformers adds to the pain of contemplating the reckless 
onslaught which the irritable race of Luther's followers now 
made upon Melanclithon, discharging its resentment upon him 
in a manner not the most gentle in the world. Putting out 
of consideration the rudeness and lack of polish perceptible in 
the language in which these zealots strove to make reparation 
to their departed leader, we can readily understand the 
indignation which became more and more vehement in the 
opponents of Melanchthon at each fresh manifestation of 
pliancy and timidity on the part of the latter. Ere now he 
had been compelled to listen to bitter reproaches from some of 
the noblest representatives of the Eeformation, and in secret, 
we doubt not, had been forced to acknowledge their justice. 
At the present juncture he encountered the reproaches of 
Brenz, who had preferred proscription to a false peace, and 
who now wrote to him from the place of his exile. Nor did 
Calvin, with whom he had recently contracted a bond of 
friendship, conceal his displeasure on this occasion. It must, 
however, have been doubly painful to Melanchthon when 
former pupils of his, who had looked up to him as their master, 
and in whom he had taken a fatherly interest, threw down 
tlie gauntlet to him. Prominent among a number wlio thus 

' In April 1548 he wrote to Carlowitz : " I was foriiieriy compelled to cringe 
ignoniiiiiously to Luther, like a slave, on occasions when he gave way to his 
stubborn self-will, a cpuility of which he possessed no small share, instead of 
lonsidering his own personal dignity or the common weal " {Corp. Bef. vi. 
p. 880). 


acted was Matthias Flacius (Flacich) of Illyria, a young man 
of an ardent and impetuous temper, but at the same time a 
sound scholar and thoroughly decided in his convictions. 
Through the mediation of Melanchthon, he had formerly held 
the position of teacher of Hebrew at Wittenberg, but had since 
1540 been preaching at Magdeburg. To the latter city those 
who were dissatisfied with the interim retired, as " to the 
court of appeal of God and Christ ; " and thence proceeded 
the most violent attacks upon the instrument and its composers. 
Flacius called the Saxon theologians Achabites, Baalites, 
Epicureans, lovers of the Babylonish harlot, corrupters of 
religion, secret Papists, etc. But the fatal dilemma in which 
good Melanchthon was placed can be comprehended only 
when we consider that on his slightest resistance to a false 
mediation, he was accused by the imperial party of obstinacy, 
of being an " alarmist," and even of sedition.-^ How was it 
possible for him to suit all, with the best will in the world, 
lacking as he was in that energy and boldness which Luther 
possessed, and which could force their way through a thousand 
obstructing scruples ! But to evade the difficulties which 
beset his path, to withdraw his head from the noose, as a 
coward would have done, Melanchthon was far too great and 
too noble. With what joy another in his position would have 
hailed the invitation to England received by Melanchthon in 
the summer of 1548 ! Philip, however, declined the call, 
being unwilling to leave Germany at so fateful a crisis. 
Truly, the man who unflinchingly endures a cross fire, 
manifests as much courage as he who with the sword cuts his 
way through opposing ranks.^ Melanchthon met the attacks 

^ In August 1548 the emperor complained to Maurice that " Fhilip Jio-mlij 
persisted in his evil and venomous temper, and everywhere opposed the 
(Augsburg) Interim " {Corp. Ref. vii. p. 127). 

* The latest biographer of Melanchthon, C. Schmidt (p. 501), very beautifully 
remarks that " there is something tragic in Melanchthon's acknowledgment of 
his own helplessness at a moment when the heroic virtues of Luther seemed so 
necessary to him ... it is a painful spectacle, and it would be still more 
painful if we did not know that this noble spirit did not set in final obscurity, 
and that what he did was the result of error, and not of unfaithfulness." 


of liis assailants witli the trust that God wouhl preserve the 
remnant of His Church despite all political revolutions. In 
regard to the violent publication of Flacius, he wrote as 
follows to a friend: ^ — " So far as I am personally concerned, 
I bear with equanimity the blow that I receive from our 
neighbours (of Madgeburg), for, as Ulysses says, I am 
accustomed to thrusts and cuts ; I am grieved only on account 
of our churches, which are slandered by false accusations, and 
in which a new seed of discord is being sown." Who can 
blame Melanchthon, vilified as he had been, for feeling pained 
at the conduct of the " Slavic fugitive," who had received 
numerous benefits from the University of Wittenberg and 
from Melanchthon personally, or for declaring that he had 
" nourished a viper in his bosom " in extending kindness to 
riacius ? He would not have been human if he had not been 
deeply moved by the behaviour of his former pupil. And yet 
he prevailed upon himself to write in all gentleness to the 
young Hotspur/ who, however, answered him roughly and 

' George Fabricius, Corp. Ref. p. 449. 

2 " I will make no attack upon you," 'Melanchthon wrote, among other 
things ; "let us bear our grief in peace, and seek you not to enkindle a fresh 
grief, more violent than the old. It is possible for men to entertain different 
opinions in reijard to the cope without for(jetting, in their difference, the com- 
mandment of love. Let us rather strive, with united strength, to defend 
necessary doctrine ; conflict in abundance is threatening from without, there- 
fore it would be better for the Church if we two were to exercise a mutual 
forbearance. My consolation is, that the Lord will protect His Church, that 
He will abide with her to the end of the world, and that in this land the gospel 
is purely preached, all articles of faith are held without adulteration, and the 
sacraments are duly administered " (Schmidt, I.e. p. 522 ; comp. Corp. Ref. 
vii. p. 477). It has been justly remarked that, long before the so-called 
Adiaphoristic controversy, Luther expressed a similar opinion concerning 
liturgical matters. When in 1539 Elector Joachim ii. of Brandenburg, in 
iutroducing the Reformation in his dominions, desired to retain several Catholic 
usages, Luther wrote to Buchholzer, one of the couiposersof the new ecclesiastical 
constitution, as follows : — " If your master will permit you to preach the gospel 
of Christ in simplicity, clearness, and purity, without any human addition, and 
to administer the two sacraments of Baptism and the Blood of Jesus Christ 
according to His institution, and will order the invocation of the saints, as 
helpers, mediators, and intercessors, to be abandoned, and will forbid the 
bearing of the sacrament about in procession, ami will put a stop to the daily 


There are everywhere sordid souls who can discover none 
but base motives for the weaknesses of great men, and in the 
case of Melanchthon there were not lacking some who declared 
that he had been the recipient of a bribe, thereby assailing 
the honour of the wounded man in the most sensitive quarter. 
But Melanchthon could easily disregard such suspicions. His 
tender conscience disquieted him with reproaches of a nobler 
sort. In view of all this, it was the more soothing to him to 
receive words of encouragement again, such as were addressed 
to him by Martin Bucer, and especially by Landgrave Philip, 
who, a few years later (June 1555), cheered him with the 
following lines : ^ — " Dear Philip, — There are people whose 
delight it is to asperse your name ; we regard them not, 
however, being assured that you well know how to act at all 
times in a manner justifiable before God and profitable to the 
Christian Church. . . , Many things are done by godly and 
wise men which are contemned by the world and by gross- 
minded men, who obstinately persist in their own opinions 
without assigning any reasons therefor ; but God knoweth 
the hearts. Moreover, sensible and pious men well understand 
that there are matters in which we should act as occasion 
requires, provided we transgress not the command of God. 

masses for the dead, and forbid tlie consecration of water, salt, and herbs, and 
will have pure responsories and songs sung, in Latin and Gei-man, in the pro- 
cession, then, in God's name, join in the procession, and wear a cross of silver 
or of gold, and a hood or cope of velvet, silk, or linen. And if your master, the 
elector, be not satisfied with o)ie hood or cope, then put on three, as Aaron the 
high priest put on three coats, one above another, all of them glorious and 
beautiful. And if his electoral grace be not content with j'our going about 
and making a noise and singing one circuUus or procession, then go around 
seven times, as Joshua, together with the children of Israel, marched around 
Jericho, blowing with trumpets and shouting. And if your master so desire, 
he may go before you, leaping and dancing, with harps, timbrels, cymbals, and 
bells, as David did before the ark of the Lord. I am content. For such 
things, if they be not abused, neither add anything to nor take anything from 
the gospel ; provided only that they be not accounted necessary to salvation, and 
that men's consciences be not bound thereby. And if J could agree with the 
pope and the Papists on such terms as these, how would I thanh Ood and he 
joijful ! " Thus Luther (De Wette, v. No. 1903). 

^ Corp. Ref. viii. p. 495 ; also RoMMEL, vol. iii. p. 304 ; and Schmidt, 
p. 529. 


May God long preserve you in health, for the benefit of the 
community and of His Church." 

We will now return to a consideration of the further course 
of history. 

In November 1549 Paul in. died, being succeeded in 
February 1550 by Julius Hi. (John Maria Giocci). This man 
had been active, as Papal legate, in the Council of Trent ; but 
after his elevation to the pontificate, he manifested more care 
for worldly enjoyment than for the Church, the conduct of 
which he in great measure relinquished to Cardinal Crescentio. 

The new pontiff immediately j)laced himself on good terms 
M'ith the emperor, and in November 1550 he appointed the 
council, whose sessions had meantime been interrupted, to be 
resumed at Trent on the 1st of May 1551. The proclamation 
was worded in the ancient style of the Roman court, the pope 
being denominated the first vicar of Christ, and heresy being 
condemned beforehand. Only the sinritual princes of the 
empire were convoked at this time. The emperor was not 
pleased with the proclamation, and intimated to the pope his 
opinion that it was necessary to allure heretics with gentle- 
ness, just as it is requisite to conceal from wild beasts the net 
in which it is proposed to capture them. The pope, however, 
made answer to the emperor that it was far from being his 
intention to entice the heretics and afterwards contend with 
them as prisoners ;^ he thought it better to leave open to 
therti a way to escape. The emperor, on the other hand, 
endeavoured to appease the Protestants in view of the harsh 
tone of the convocation bull ; he advised them not to let the 
severity of that instrument deter them from attending the 
council, and offered them safe-conduct and a satisfactory 
hearing.^ In the meantime another Diet was held at Augs- 
burg in July 1550. But few princes made their appearance 

' [Literally, "scuffle with a captured cat."] 

* This, truly, was little in accordance with an imperial edict, issued from 
Brussels and addressed to the civil functionaries, commanding the latter to aid 
the in([uisitors in the Netherlands in their proceedings against Protestants. 


ou tins occasion. Even Maurice absented himself. He com- 
missioned his delegate to inform the emperor that it would 
be impossible for him to have anything to do with the council, 
if that body did not commence its deliberations afresh, if a 
casting vote were not conceded to the Evangelical theologians, 
and if the pope himself were not subordinated to the council. 
The emperor inquired of the states as to why they had not 
yet introduced the interim, to which the delegates replied that 
efforts had been made to introduce it, but that the Evangelical 
religion having once taken root in the hearts of the masses, 
was not so quickly to be dislodged ; it would be necessary to 
accustom the people to the interim by degrees. The Elector 
of Brandenburg, Joachim ii., whose son had become Arch- 
bishop of Magdeburg, and who was soli citing the Papal con- 
firmation of tliis appointment, expressed his willingness to 
send delegates to the council. In the beginning of the year 
1552 that assembly was also visited by delegates from the 
l^lectorate of Hesse (Melanchthon among the number), and 
from Wurtemberg, bearing with them the Confessions of their 
respective states ; ^ private conferences were accorded them, 
but without avail. 

The solution of the difficulty came from another quarter. 
We have seen that Maurice had begun to assume towards the 
emperor a position which was by no means that of an un- 
conditional vassal. The imprisonment of his father-in-law, 
Philip of Hesse, had now continued for upwards of four 
years, — we shall see presently in what manner he was treated, 
— and Maurice thought it high time that he should be re- 
leased. In October 1550 Maurice was commissioned by the 
emperor to assist in besieging the city of Magdeburg, which 
still resolutely opposed the adoption of the interim. The 
siege, in which other princes, of whom Duke George of 
Mecklenburg was one, participated, continued for a year and 
seven months. It was languidly prosecuted for a time ; but 

^ The Confessions to wliieh we refer were the above-mentioned Confessio Wiir- 
temberglca of Brenz, and the Conffssio Snxonka (Repetitio Covf. Aiigvstance). 


Maurice at leugtli took into his service the Count of HeiJeck, 
a Protestant, who had fought in the Schmalkaldic War, and 
distinguished himself in the Swabian army, but had been 
proscribed by the emperor. On the 3d of September 1551 
a truce was declared, and in the following November the city 
capitulated. j\Iagdeburg was forced to surrender to Maurice 
at discretion, and was assured of its privileges only on the 
payment of a heavy requisition. It was to accept the last 
decrees of the Diet of Augsburg in regard to secular matters 
only, and not those relating to religion ; the interim conse- 
quently was set aside. Maurice became Burgrave of Magdeburg. 

During the siege, which merits more particular mention, 
the city displayed extraordinary courage. The services of the 
sanctuary were continued amid the thunder of the cannon. 
As Bugenhagen had once sustained the faith of the Witten- 
bergers, Erasmus Alber now supported that of the people of 
Magdeburg, assisting them at the same time to retain their 
good humour. When the tower of St. James fell down, the 
burghers jestingly declared that it, like themselves, was 
unwilling to accept the interim. After the capitulation, 
Maurice treated the citizens with great consideration. Many 
who had regarded him as Antichrist, or, at the least, as 
Antichrist's forerunner, now beheld in him a generous victor. 

Maurice's plans against the emperor also revealed them- 
selves at this time. Charles was most unwilling to believe 
that ]\Iaurice had any secret designs against him, but the 
fact nevertheless remained. Before the capture of Magde- 
l)urg, Maurice had concluded an alliance with Henry ii. of 
France, successor to Francis i., for the protection of religious 
liberty in Germany, and especially for the final release of 
Maurice's father-in-law, tlie landgrave, in whose behalf several 
princes had ere now interceded in vain. 

Let us tarry for a moment to consider the sufferings and 
torments to which Philip was exposed.^ He was, in the first 

' We follow the authentic reports presented by RoMMELL, ii. pp. 515-550. 
Comp. Mariieineke, iv. pp. 487 sqq. 


place; dragged from one city to another, lodged in miserable 
quarters, and treated in a most nnprincely manner. Not- 
withstanding this, however, he retained his princely dignity 
even in his bonds. From his dungeon he governed his land, 
in which the enemy, in the persons of imperial and Spanish 
commissaries, externally bore sway. He entered into all the 
minutiai of agriculture and domestic economy. His councillors 
occasionally sent him some wine or a few casks of Eimbecker 
beer for his refreshment. In the transportation of these 
gifts, Hessian waggoners were employed, who managed also to 
convey letters to the prisoner. While Philip was at Donau- 
worth, his faithful servant, Simon Bing, sent him a prayer- 
book. He exchanged the most touching letters with his 
" dear wife." Melanchthon also wrote him a letter of consola- 
tion. So great, however, was the indiscretion of his guards, 
tliat the Spanish captain insisted upon reading all the letters 
which arrived for Philip before the latter received them, in 
order that Alba might be apprised of their contents. Philip's 
son-in-law, Maurice, wrote him that nothing on God's earth 
so distressed him as this shameful treatment. Philip returned 
answer that the plague had broken out among the soldiers 
appointed to guard him, and that he himself was apprehensive 
of being attacked by the disease. He was disgusted with 
the odour of garlic which was exhaled from his guards, 
and their incessant talking was so burdensome to him as to 
frequently disturb his sleep. Instead of four guards, the 
appointed number, from ten to twelve were usually seated in 
the narrow prison chamber. When the landgrave slept, they 
would draw the curtains apart to see " whether he had escaped 
through a crack or a mouse-hole." The fact that all this was 
happening while Maurice was enjoying himself vexed the 
prisoner exceedingly, nor did he hesitate to express his 
chagrin in his letters. He wrote as follows to the two 
electors : ^ — " If your graces were as diligent in my affairs as 
in banqueting, entertaining your friends, and playing, my 
' Maurice of Saxony and Joachim of Brandenburg. 

292 HISTORY OF the keformation. 

conditiou would long ago liave been improved." If these 
gentlemen, he declared, thus continued to fear a little anger 
and resentment, to which they might expose themselves in 
interceding more heartily for him, their reputation with their 
contemporaries and with posterity would be injured — their 
conduct would be " recorded in history." The Hessian council- 
lors, and I'rinces William and Louis, also wrote to the electors, 
stating that " whoever was acquainted with the temperament 
of the landgrave, must apprehend that, if his imprisonment 
lasted much longer, he would become a prey to melancholy, 
insanity, or death." His sufferings were not yet to end, 
however. On the contrary, the emperor, angered afresh by 
something that the landgrave had svritten, deprived the sick 
man, who was afflicted witli a severe cough, of his physician 
(Megebach), his secretary, and other servants ; two pages only 
were left to him, and allowed to sleep in his roonl. Paper 
and ink were also denied him. More compassion than the 
emperor manifested towards the captive landgrave was shown 
by the emperor's sister, Maria, Governess of the Netherlands. 
Slie, in company with the landgravine and many ladies of the 
court, prostrated herself before the emperor, and besought his 
mercy for I'hilip, but received from him only the answer that 
" in his own time he would show himself gracious." The sole 
concession that Christina obtained was permission to visit her 
sick husband at Speier, (She afterwards died of consumption, 
the course of which was accelerated by grief. Before her 
death, she once more, by letter, petitioned the emperor in 
behalf of her husband.) The removal of the prisoner from 
Speier to Worms afforded a lamentalile spectacle. Seated 
upon a miserable jade, unarmed, and surrounded by Spanish 
soldiers, Philip was escorted from one prison to another like 
a common criminal, while the populace ran after him, shouting, 
" There goes the rebellious and faithless rogue and good-for- 
nought ! " 

The landgrave was finally transported from Donauworth 
and Nordlingen to Oudenarde, in the Netherlands, and from 


the latter place to Mechlin, wliere he was lodged iu the rear 
of the imperial palace. There he edified himself with the 
writings of some of the fathers of the Church, — Augustine, 
Jerome, and Ambrose, — whose works he caused to be brought 
to him in his prison. The Holy Scriptures, however, were 
his chief consolation. The passages that seemed to him 
especially applicable to his situation (such, for instance, as, 
" Hope maketh not ashamed "), he underlined with red crayon, 
and also commented on them in the margin. There still 
exist in the library at Cassel two folio Bibles containing 
such glosses. It was seldom that the prisoner was permitted to 
breathe the fresh air. On rare occasions he was placed in a 
carriage and driven about, as he himself expresses it, "like a lion 
or a show." After performing his morning devotions, he had 
nothing to do but to walk up and down in his room, or to play a 
game then in vogue, called Centum trcs, or occasionally chess or 
nine-pins. " You," he wrote to his councillors at Cassel, " have 
the advantage of me ; you can have your wives with you : 
you are with your friends ; I am with enemies : you are with 
true believers ; I am with a superstitious people." The 
Spaniards beset him with religious discourses. " They regard 
Lutherans," so writes the landgrave, " as worse than Turks or 
Moors." They thought that the killing of all the Lutherans, 
if they could but have accomplished it, would be as efficacious 
as an indulgence. These theological disputes were forbidden 
at last. Philip continued his care for his country and house- 
hold in liis ISTetherland prison. The place in which he was 
at this time confined was at least clean, and a gratifying 
testimony to his humanity is borne by the order which he 
issued shortly after his removal thither, that " the bad, 
unclean prisons " [in his own dominions], " where serpents and 
toads are harboured, and many persons perish," should be 
amended with all possible speed ; for to suffer prisoners thus 
to perish was, he declared, a great sin, and one that God 
would not permit to go unpunished. He also touchingly 
commends his do'T; to the kind care of Prince William. 

294 HISTORY OF the keformatiox. 

At the time of the second Diet at Augsburg (July 1550), 
the two electors had again petitioned for the release of the 
landgrave ; their intercession was, however, fruitless. An 
unsuccessful attempt for the deliverance of Philip, made 
toward the close of the year,^ only aggravated his hardships. 
He was now deprived of all his servants. The thought of 
the victims sacrificed on this occasion (several Hessians who 
had participated in the adventure were hanged) had a sadden- 
ing effect upon the spirits of the landgrave, though he held 
that the sufferers had but performed their duty as his subjects. 
It was feared that the profound melancholy of the landgrave 
would culminate in insanity. He was confined in a chamber 
ten feet long, the windows of which were nailed up. Even 
from this dungeon he despatched solicitations to his friends, 
requesting not only money, articles of wearing apparel, and 
medicines, but also books, such as the w^orks of Eusebius and 
Chrysostom, histories of the emperors and popes, etc. 

At length the hour of his release sounded, being hastened 
by the further course of events in the empire. 

In March of the year 1552, Maurice, in conjunction with 
other German princes, John Albert of ]\Iecklenburg, and the 
son of the captive landgrave, William of Hesse, supported by 
troops of the Margrave of Brandenburg, publicly took the field. 

Maurice marched through Franconia and Swabia, took 
possession in April of the city of Augsburg, and in May 
advanced as far as Insbruck. Wherever he went, he abolished 
the imperial regulations and reinstated the Protestant magis- 
trates and preachers who had been expelled from office. In 
his public manifesto against the emperor, he stated three points 
which he assigned as his reasons for undertaking the present 
war; they were as follows: — (1) The suppression of religion; 
(2) The continued imprisonment of the landgrave ; (3) The 
violation of the laws of the empire. In the meantime, the King 
of France, with his army, had invaded the three bishoprics 
of Metz, Tull, and Verdun. The Turks simultaneously 
^ For particulai-s, see Rommel, I.e. 


made an invasion into Transylvania. In short, the emperor 
found himself pressed on all sides and under the necessity of 
seeking peace. The first negotiations to that end were con- 
cluded at Linz, with the emperor's brother Ferdinand. A Diet 
was then appointed to be held at Passau, pending which, 
a truce was to be observed. The emperor, meantime, had 
assembled his troops in the highlands. Maurice attacked 
them and was victorious. The emperor fled to Villach in 
Carinthia. Maurice next appeared before Frankfort-on-the- 
Maiu, which was garrisoned by a strong body of imperial 
troops. While he was engaged in besieging this city, the 
Bohemian chancellor brought to his camp articles of peace. 
Maurice accej)ted them, and on the 2d of August 1552, the 
treaty of Passau was concluded between Ferdinand, king of 
the Eomans, on the one hand, and the Elector Maurice and 
his allies on the other. The first condition was the release 
of Landgrave Philip. John Frederick, elector of Saxony, who 
had followed the emperor everywhere as his prisoner, had 
received the offer of liberty in May, when Maurice was 
approaching Insbruck, but had not then accepted it. " I would 
gladly," he declared jestingly, "abide by the court, if the 
court would abide by me." It was not until the 2 2d of 
August that he set out for his home, in company with his son 
and his friend, Lucas Kranach. On the 24th of September, 
the three were greeted at Jena with acclamations of joy, and 
on the 26 th they entered Weimar. On the 14th of September 
(the day of the exaltation of the cross [Holy-rood Day]), 
Melanchthon, in his own name and in the name of the 
University of Wittenberg, addressed an affectionate epistle to 
John Frederick, in testimony of his joy that the Lord had 
now turned the elector's cross and had raised him to honour 
again. The elector (l7th October) thanked his Wittenberg 
theologians for their sympathy, and expressed the hope that 
God would continue graciously to preserve His word and His 
Church.^ Landgrave Philip was finally released from his 
1 Corp. Ref. vii. pp. 1(;95, 1108, and 1109. 

296 HISTORY OF the keformation. 

" custody " oi' Jive years' duiatiuii on the 4tli of SeptemLer. 
His hair had become grey during his captivity, and he was 
broken in body and in mind. His meeting with his people 
was painfully sad. At Marburg he received the mendjers of 
the University at the castle. On the following Sunday 
(12th September) he arrived at Cassel. The burghers poured 
fortli from the city to meet him and escort him to the cathedral. 
There I'hilip knelt before the monument of his wife, and 
continued in the same posture until the close of the sermon 
and the commencement of tlie Anibrosian chant. On the 
1 7th of September his entii'e dominions celebrated the return 
of their beloved sovereign. The Swiss Church, also, testified 
its joy at the event. Henry Bullinger greeted the returned 
landgrave in a congratulatory letter of the 1st of November. 

The second condition of peace stipulated for by Maurice 
had reference to the interim and its abolition. It was also 
determined that a Diet should be held within six months, for 
tlie purpose of considering whether the existent differences 
could be best removed by a general Christian council, or by a 
special German ecclesiastical assembly, or in some other way. 
In the meantime, neither party was to interfere with the other. 
It was agreed, in the third place, that the judicial rights of 
both parties should be equal. In the fourth place, it was 
determined that investigations should be instituted in regard 
to complaints relative to alleged violations of the liberties of 
the empire, and that an amnesty should be proclaimed by way 
of indemnification for such violations. And finally, in the 
fifth place, it was agreed that the sentence of proscription 
passed upon those who had taken part in the Schmalkaldic 
War should be abrogated. 

But before this treaty of Passau had been formally sanctioned, 
an incident occurred which deferred the formal conclusion of 
peace. Albert of Brandenburg, who until this time had been 
tlie friend of Maurice, having grown up with him and shared 
with him the perils of war, now quarrelled with the Saxon 
prince on account of the stipulations of this same treaty of 


Passau. Its conditions failing to harmonize with his designs, 
he refused to be bound by it, and prosecuted the war on his 
own account. He ravaged the Khenish territories, West- 
phalia, and Franconia.^ Maurice felt constrained to put a 
stop to these depredations. He accordingly advanced against 
the margrave at the head of an army, and defeated him in a 
bloody engagement near the village of Sievershausen, in the 
territory of Liineburg (9th July 1553). When already 
assured of his victory, Maurice was mortally wounded in the 
conflict, and died on the 12th of July 1553, at the age of 
thirty-two. While he was incontestably the possessor of 
eminent talents, and one who, by the mere intrepidity of his 
bearing, impressed all with whom he came in contact, his 
character has, from various standpoints, been variously judged. 
He can scarcely be cleared from the charge of a craftiness of 
mind which frequently proceeded to great lengths and often 
expressed itself in a duplicity of conduct. The Elector John 
Frederick insisted that his cousin formed no exception to the 
truth of the proverb, Ein Mcissner, ein Gleissncr [ " Show 
me a Misnian, and I'll show you a dissembler "]."' Whether 
he was sincere in the profession of his faith or not, who will 
venture to judge ? Of deep religious motives we certainly find 
no traces in his conduct. Religion with him was subordinate 
to politics. Landgrave Philip, who knew him well, accused him 
of dealing with religion as with secular things (such as goods, 
estates, fields, meadows), as if one should say, " Leave me 
this, and I will leave you that." '^ And yet Providence made 

1 " Margrave Albert," writes Melanchthon (12th July) to the King of Den- 
mark, " has (lone a great deal of damage around Nuremberg, having burned one 
hundred and eighty villages . . . besides this, he has demanded two tons of 
gold, and powder and guns ; he has also impoverished the Bishops of Bamberg 
and Wiirzljurg, and has now marched towards Frankfort-on-the-Main " {Corp. 
lief. vii. p. 1026). On these ravages comp. also a letter from Melanchthon to 
Calvin, written in October, I.e. p. 1086, and Corp. Ref. viii. p. 198. 

2 Hauser, p. 232. 

' Hauskr, ibid. Raxke (vol. v. p. 317) remarks concerning Maurice : " His 
vi-as a nature the like of which cannot be found in Germany. So cautious and 
secretive, so enterprising and energetic was he ; possessing so much foresight, 
yet so perfectly at home in the execution of his plans ; and withal so destitute 


use of this very man to conduct tlie struggle of the ricfornia- 
tion in Germany to its conclusion. What all the diplomatic 
negotiations at the various Diets could not effect, — what all 
the religious conferences and mediatorial efforts could not 
accomplish, was performed by the craft of an apparent apostate. 
Humanly speaking, Germany has him to thank for religious 
and political liberty. He was succeeded in the government of 
Saxony by his brother, Duke Augustus. The latter concluded 
the treaty of Naumburg with the former elector, John 
Frederick, by the provisions of which treaty John Frederick 
formally resigned the electorate, but retained the title of 
elector. This sorely-tried prince died soon afterwards (3d 
JNIarch 1554), having enjoyed his liberty during a year and 
a lialf only. But a few hours before his death, he exhorted 
his family and his friends to be constant to the Evangelical 
doctrine. He was succeeded by his son, John Frederick ii,, 
surnamed the Mediate. 

On the 5th of February 1555, the Did of Aur/shurr/ was 
finally opened by King Ferdinand, it having been postponed 
during the two preceding years on account of the political 
conjunctures. Ferdinand, who was more pacifically disposed 
than his brother, revealed his intention to establish a per- 
manent peace even in case a religious understanding could not 
yet be arrived at. And, indeed, such an understanding was 
not to be thought of. The Protestants were resolved not to 
depart from the Augsburg Confession. The Piomish party, on 
the other hand, was willing to grant a peace to the Protestants 
only upon condition that the latter should return to the bosom 
of the Catholic Church. The imperial commissioner. Otto, 
Cardinal-Bishop of Augsburg, and Count Truchsess-Waldburg 

of fidelity and personal consideration ; Maurice was a man of flesh and blood, a 
person whose importance as a workinff power was due not to any system of ideas 
which he had formed, but to his bare existence and presence. His procedures 
were of decisive moment in the fortunes of Protestantism. His defection 
from that system after he had once embraced it, brought it to the verge of 
ruin ; his subsequent defection from the emperor was the means of the 
restoration of liberty." See the further description of the character of Maurice, 
l)p. 221 S([([. 


by birth, was, in particular, a most vigorous opposer of all 
plans tending to peace. In the midst of the Diet, tidings of 
the death of Pope Julius iii. arrived. The Papal legate and 
the Bishop of Augsburg immediately departed for the purpose 
of being present at the conclave. The choice of the cardinals 
fell upon Marcellus ii., who in one month was succeeded by 
Paul IV. During the vacancies of the pontifical see, Ferdinand 
was enabled the more freely to prosecute his negotiations for 
peace. There were still all sorts of objections to overcome. 
Special difficulty was occasioned by the question as to the 
course to be pursued in regard to ecclesiastical estates, in the 
case of spiritual princes who joined the Evangelical Church. 
This was termed the question of " spiritual reservation " (rcscr- 
vatum ecdesiasticum). It was the cause of many sharp words. 
The Protestants were charged with appearing to be more con- 
cerned about their fiscus than about their Christns. So far, 
indeed, did the controversy proceed, that a dissolution of the 
assembly seemed imminent. An agreement was finally arrived 
at, however, concerning tlie following principles. The adherents 
of the Augsburg Confession, as well as of the old religion, 
should be permitted to enjoy complete and undisturbed 
liberty ; " neither party should molest the other ;" no state 
should force its religion upon any other state or its subjects. 
In regard to ecclesiastical estates, it v/as agreed that such as 
were occupied by the Protestants previous to the treaty of 
Passau should remain in their possession. The Protestants 
were also placed on an equality with the Catholics in a 
political point of view, access to the Imperial Chamber being 
accorded to them.^ All these concessions were, however, 
expressly confined to the adherents of the Augsburg Confes- 
sion. All Confessions except the Catholic and Lutheran were 
excluded from the terms of the agreement, the Eeformed 

^ " It was also determined that the Evangelical princes should again be entitled 
to their customary places in the Imperial Chamber, and that difference in religion 
should henceforth form no hindrance in secular matters and offices. This recess 
is someivhat milder than the recesses of former Diets " (Melanchthon in his 
" Annals of 1555," Corp. Ref. viii. p. 652). 


Churches being, of course, excluded among the rest. This 
religions 'peace, which Ijrings the history of the German Refor- 
mation to a conclusion, was promulgated on the 25tli and 2Gth 
of September 1555. 

The above-mentioned agreement was a virtual recognition 
of the dualism of religious confessions so far as Germany was 
concerned, and the unity of the empire was thereby un- 
doubtedly fractured in the same measure in which that unity 
was regarded as dependent upon the unity of religious creed. 
On the basis of this very agreement, however, although not 
until after the lapse of more than one century, the nation 
became convinced that its political unity is not bound up with 
a confessional unity, but that it is possible for the German 
people, even while entertaining different religious convictions, 
to stand together on the soil of one and the same fatherland, 
and resist the encroachments of foreign powers. 

Soon after the establishment of the Peace of Augsburg, 
Charles v., weary of the ceaseless conflicts and the unrest 
which pertained to his exalted position as ruler of the German 
Empire, laid aside his crown and retired to the cloister of St. 
Justus, near Placentia in Estremadura. There he died on the 
21st of September 1558, at the age of fifty-nine. 





THE Peace of Augsburg (1555) forms the (relative) con- 
clusion of the history of the German Eeformation. It 
does not, ho^vever, conclude the history of Pteform in Switzer- 
land and other countries. We nevertheless adopt the period 
in a general reference, it being our intention to treat of the 
events which occurred after that time in a subsequent series 
of lectures. At present, therefore, we have merely to notice 
those incidents in the Eeformation in Switzerland and else- 
where which fall within or near the period indicated, with- 
out confining ourselves too strictly to the limits of the year 

We dropped the thread of our history of the Swiss Eefor- 
mation after touching upon the reformatory movements in 
Eomanic Switzerland and Geneva. Eesuming our narrative 
at this point, we introduce without delay an individual who, 
in company with Luther and Zwingle, must be styled the 
third personage of the Eeformation, when the actual heroes 
thereof are discussed, — we refer to Calvin. In terming him 
the third in the trio of Eeformers alluded to, we express no 
order of merit. In point of time he is indisputably the third. 

When Calvin's star appeared on the historical horizon, the 
star of Luther, although brilliant still, was near its setting, — 
we refer, of course, to Luther's bodily life on earth. Zwingle 
and Q^colampadius had already been removed from this world 


wlien Calvin first set foot on Swiss soil. Calvin was a con- 
temporary of Melanchtlion and Bullinger, rather than of 
Luther and Zwingle. Even in reference to Geneva, his work 
was not that of a Eeformer who, battling with an existing 
order of things, succeeds in overthrowing the ancient system, 
but rather that of one who has erected a new system on the 
ruins of the old. In a word, the importance of his labours in 
the cause of Eeform is due not to their negative, but to their 
positive tendency. Yet even he found much that it was 
necessary to clear away before he could build. 

John Calvin (Jean Cauvin, Calderius)^ was born on the 
10th of July 1509, at iSToyon in Picardy. He sprang from 
a respectable family, tlie members of which, although not 
wealthy, were in comfortable circumstances. His father, 
John Gerard, of the village of Pont I'Eveque, was at one time, 
like the father of Bucer, a cooper, but subsequently became 
fiscal-procurator of the county of Noyon and secretary of the 
bishop. His mother, whose maiden name was Jeanne Le franc, 
was a native of Cambrai. Young Calvin received a good — 
indeed, we may say a superior — education in connection witli 
the children of the house of Montmort, a noble family. In 
comparison with Luther and Zwingle, the life of Calvin 
exhibits from the outset a more aristocratic impress, although 
lie himself, like the German and the Swiss Eeformers, issued 

1 The first who wrote a narrative of Calvin's life was Tlieodore Beza, in 
1564. Modern history had for a long time but brief notices to present. Bret- 
schneider, general superintendent of the Lutheran Church in Gotha, first con- 
tributed to the lieformationsalmanach of 1821 a .short sketch of " the character 
and spirit of the Reformer." The last thirty years have been productive r ' 
a number of more extensive presentations of the important life to which we 
refer. Among his biographers may be mentioned the following ; — Paul Henuy, 
Leben Johann Calvins, des r/rossen Reformators, 3 vols., Berlin, 1835-44 ; 
EnxsT Staiielin (in vol. iv. of the Vdter und Begriinder, etc., Elberfeld, 
1863, 1 and 2) ; Bungener, Calvin, sa vie, son ceuvre, et ses ecrits, Paris, 1862 
(Eng. Trans., Edinburgh, Clark). From the Catholic (not Ultramontane) 
standpoint : Kampschulte, Johann Calvin, seine Kirche und sein Staat im 
Gen/., 1 vol., Lei[isic, 1869. We shall refer hereafter to Galliffe and Calvin's 
opponents. Calvin's letters occupy an important place in the history of his 
life : Leitres de Jean Calvin, par Jules Bonnet (LeUres Frangaises), Paris, 1854, 
2 vols. An English translation of his French and Latin letters was published 
at Edinburgli in 1857 (2 vols.). 


from the ranks of the burghers. The boy early distinguished 
himself not only by the excellence of his powers of apprehen- 
sion, but also by his strict morality and his zeal for the 
observance of the same by others. He was frequently the 
censor of his playmates. His schoolfellows are said to have; 
nicknamed him the " Accusative." His father designed him 
for the priesthood ; and when he was but twelve years old, he 
received a prebend from the Bishop of Noyon to aid him 
in the prosecution of his studies. The Catholics afterwards 
reproached him on this account, saying that the Church, in 
nourishing him at her breast, had cherished a viper in her 
bosom. Together with the sons of the house of Montmort, 
he repaired, when in his fifteenth year, to Paris, where he 
enjoyed the instruction of the celebrated Maturinus Corderius 
(Cordier), in the College de la Manche. Calvin afterwards, 
spoke with much feeling of this instructor. It was to him, 
the Ciceronian, that Calvin was indebted for the pure and 
idiomatic style which distinguishes his Latin writings.^ In 
the College de Montaigu {ah aciUo monte) he studied dialectics 
under the direction of a learned Spaniard. At this period of 
his life he was still heartily devoted to the religion of his 
fathers, and conscientiously complied with the rules of the 
Church.^ He also took pleasure in the writings of the School- 
men ; they were, indeed, for a time his favourite authors, 
and he indisputably derived much instruction from them. 
Although he had already received the tonsure, and, as has 
previously been remarked, was in occupation of a prebend,'"' 
with the consent of his father he resolved to study law. 
(This incident in his life bears some resemblance to a circum- 

' He dedicated his commentary on tlie First Epistle to the Thessalonians to 

2 "I was," Calvin subsecjuently confessed, " so stiff-necked an adherent of 
Papal superstition that it seemed impossible that I could ever be drawn out of 
that sewer. " It is somewhat remarkable that, a few years later, Ignatius Loyola, 
founder of the Jesuit order, sat at the feet of the same teacher who had instructed 
Calvin, in the same College in which the Reformer had studied. 

* He had, however, exchanged the prebend of Pont TEveque for that of St. 
Martin de Marteville, the one which was first presented to him. 


stance in the life of Luther.) He therefore repaired to the 
famous law school of Orleans, in which Peter Stella (Pierre 
I'Etoile) was a professor. There Calvin's assiduity in study 
was equalled only by the quickness of his apprehension and 
the surprising fidelity of his memory. Without solicitation 
on his own part he was made Doctor of Laws. It was not 
his intention, in devoting himself to the study of jurisprudence, 
to abandon that of theology ; a change in his religious views 
was, however, already in course of preparation. Through the 
instrumentality of his kinsman, Peter Olivetanus, his attention 
had ere now been directed to the improprieties of the Piomish 
Church. His own study of the Bible had also suggested to 
him many new ideas. In the year 1529 he removed from 
Orleans to Pourges, where the renowned Alciat was teaching 
jurisprudence. At the latter place he formed the acquaintance 
of a German, Melchior Wolmar, a Swabian by birth, from the 
city of Piotweil. By him Calvin was apprised of tlie events 
which had been taking place in Germany since Luther had 
originated the great religious movement. From this time 
Calvin studied the Bible with increased diligence, and, in 
order that he might be enabled to examine it in the original, 
he applied himself most assiduously to the study of the Greek 
and Hebrew languages. He also preached from time to time. 
While at Bourges, Calvin was called home by the death of 
his father ; he, however, went soon afterwards to I'aris, M'here 
he devoted himself entirely to theology. At the same time 
a mighty change took place in his inner man. Having now 
broken with the old faith, it remained for him to erect a new 
system within himself At about this time the little flock of 
Evangelical believers in l*aris had been strengthened and 
confirmed. To them Calvin joined himself, attended their 
meetings, and delivered lectures before theim. His discourses 
generally closed with the words, " If God be for us, who can 
be against us?" It would be a mistake to suppose that the 
Christian earnestness which now took possession of his soul 
diverted him from the study of the ancient classics. On the 

Calvin's defence of the evangelical pkinciples. 305 

contrary, Calvin commenced his literary career by publishing- 
Seneca's treatise, De dementia, on which he wrote a com- 
mentary. It has been suggested that the exhibition of this 
mirror of morals was an apologetic effort on the part of Calvin 
to influence the King of France to manifest clemency towards 
the Protestants, or that he was thereby attempting dog- 
matically to indicate how far even the natural man, without 
the help of the gospel, may proceed in the cultivation of 
virtue ; but these are conjectures which have no secure 
basis in history. Calvin, who at this time had attained the 
age of twenty-four, was an aspiring man of learning, and it 
was in this character that he edited the above-mentioned 
treatise. The time, however, soon arrived when he was to 
become eminent not only as a man of learning, but as the 
representative of the Evangelical party. The new rector of 
the Paris University, Nicholas Copus, was to be inaugurated 
into office on All Saints' Day, 1533, when he was expected 
to deliver the discourse customary on such occasions. This 
discourse was composed for him by Calvin, and contained a 
defence of the Evangelical principles then undergoing perse- 
cution at the hands of the court and the clergy, and vigorous 
assaults upon the " sophists," many of whom it was not 
difficult to discover in the circle of auditors. Tlie address 
occasioned much commotion. It was ill received by the king, 
and also by the Sorbonne and Parliament. Copus, w^ho, from 
liaving delivered it, was regarded as its composer, fled to 
Basel, his native city. It soon, however, transpired that 
Calvin, and not Copus, was the author of the address. The 
young man was accordingly sought for at his residence, and, 
not being found, his papers were seized. Calvin himself now 
sought refuge in flight, disguised, it is said, as a vine-dresser. 
He repaired to the dominions of Queen Margaret of Navarre, 
the generous protector of the Protestants, and lived for a time 
with his friend the Canon Louis de Tillet, pastor at Claix, 
near Angouleme. There Calvin led a quiet and retired life, 
under the name of the Sieur d'Espeville. The people, who 
VOL. II. u 


were astonished at his Hellenic learning, called him nothing 
but the Greek of Claix {Ic Grec de Claix). In a grotto near 
Poitiers, which still bears the name of " Calvin's Grotto," he 
held meetings for prayer with his friends. He also visited 
the little residence of Nerac in Beam, where he met with 
Eoussel and Le Fevre. He ventured after a time to return 
to Paris, but, being subjected to fresh persecutions, sought an 
asylum at Basel, where he arrived in the year 1535. There 
he made acquaintance with the learned Simon Gryn^eus, and 
there, also, he wrote his most important tlieological work, the 
materials for wliich had for some time been collecting in his 
mind, and which, like Melanchthon's Loci Communes, received 
considerable revision and alteration at various times. As 
Melanchthon's work was the principal doctrinal work of the 
Lutheran theology, so the justly-lauded treatise of Calvin 
forms even now the principal work of the Eeformed theology 
of the sixteenth century, — we refer, of course, to the In- 
stitutio Religionis Christiancc (" Institute of the Christian 
Eeligion").^ Without binding ourselves to the phraseology of 
the first edition,^ we take occasion here to present a general 

^ Previous to the issue of the Institute, Calvin's only theological work had 
been a polemical tractate against the Anabaptists, combating their idea of the 
soul's sleep {De psychopannychia). The histitiitio was published at Basel, in 
Latin, in 1536 (the idea that an earlier edition appeared in French in 1535 has 
been shown to be untenable). For information concerning the various editions 
and revisions of the work, we refer to the valuable collection of the works of 
Calvin, edited by the Strassburg Professors Baum, Cunitz, and Reuss (Braun- 
schweig, 1863 sqq.). The Institutio is there presented in accordance with the 
editions of 1536, 1539-54, 1559, and the French translation of 1541. A pocket 
edition of convenient size was published by Tholuck in 1846. The book has 
been translated into almost all languages. It was translated into modern 
German by F. A. Krummacher (1823), and into English by Henry Beveridge, 
2 vols. (Clark). 

^ The first edition, of 1536, follows, in quite an elementary manner, the 
course of the Catechism, treating — (1) of the Law (the Decalogue), (2) of the 
Creed {Symholum apostolkum), (3) of Prayer (the Our Father, etc. ), (4) of the 
Sacraments. To these divisions are added several excursus on the false sacraments, 
on Christian liberty, and on ecclesiastical authority and polity. In the later 
much-e.xpanded editions the whole work is divided into four books, the first of 
which treats of the knowledge of God as the Creator, the second is devoted to 
a consideration of the same Being as the Iledeemer, and the third exhibits Him 
as the Sanctifier (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). The fourth book treats of the 
Cliurch and the means of grace therein instituted. 

Calvin's defence of the evangelical principles. 307 

view of the entire work, as far as this is possible within tlie 
narrow limits of one chapter. AVe may with the more pro- 
priety pursue this course, since, notwithstanding all the formal 
alterations of the work, its fundamental ideas have continued 
unchanged. Let us first, however, examine the dedication to 
King Francis i. (dated 23d August 1535), with which the 
work is prefaced. 

Like the apologists of the primitive time, in their dedica- 
tions to the Eoman emperors, Calvin, taking his stand upon 
the law, demonstrates at once the injustice of condemning 
the Protestants on mere accusation. He defends them 
against the reproaches which were cast upon them. It is 
claimed, says he, that they teach a new religion ; but their 
religion can appear new only to those to whom Christ and 
His gospel are a novelty. Our opponents, he continues, 
demand miracles ; but these are not necessary, since no 
new revelation is put forth. The miracles of which the 
Eomish Church boast are frequently of a very questionable 
character. Furthermore, Satan himself may work miracles ! 
To those who cite against us the Fathers of the Church, we 
answer, in the first place, that in a majority of cases the 
Fathers are on our side. We confess, however, that their 
writings contain much of error, and therefore we cannot 
recognise them as authoritative. Many call us disturbers 
of the peace ; Elijah also was accused of troubling Israel. 
Christ and His apostles were themselves declared to be dis- 
turbers of the peace. The peace which has hitherto been 
enjoyed by the Church was the peace of Sardanapalus, and 
from such repose she should be awakened. We are charged 
with separating ourselves from the Church. This charge is 
untrue ; we do not separate from the Church of Christ, but 
from the Church of Eome. The true, the invisible Church, 
cannot be pointed out by the hand of man. And yet that 
alone, and not the visible Church, is infallible. History 
affords abundant evidence of the contradictory declarations 
of those ecclesiastical authorities, the Councils. Some there 


undoubtedly are who use their liberty as a cloak of ini(|uity. 
False brethren have crept in among us, and have excited 
dissensions. In contemplating such cases we must comfort 
ourselves with the words of Christ, who proclaimed that 
offences would come. But, as a proof that such offences do 
not originate with us, we can with a good conscience appeal 
to our conduct, which gives no occasion for complaint. Calvin 
then again entreats the king, who had turned away his heart 
from the Evangelicals, no longer to listen to the false whisper- 
ings of those who had ensnared him, and closes with the 
following words : — " Amid whatever persecutions we may be 
called upon to endure, in dungeons and in iron chains, on the 
rack or at the stake, we will submit to the uttermost, like sheep 
led to the slaughter. We will possess our souls in patience, 
and hope in the Lord and in His mighty arm. May the Lord, 
the King of kings, most mighty and illustrious king, preserve 
thy throne by righteousness, and thy seat by equity." 

In the Institutes, Calvin, like Melanchthon and Zwingle, 
pursues the psychological method of presentation, tracing out 
the origin of religion in the human breast. There exists, he 
affirms, in every man some consciousness of the divine essence 
{scnsus divinitatis). God makes Himself known to us in the 
creation and government of the world. Man is a world in 
miniature (microcosm). But man's natural knowledge of 
God is darkened by sin. It was requisite that there should 
be a revelation of God through the medium of His word, 
and such a revelation is given to us in the Holy Scriptures. 
The authority of the Scriptures is not based upon the autho- 
rity of the Church, The prophets and apostles are of greater 
antiquity than the Church. The testimony of Scripture 
harmonizes witli the testinumy of the Holy Spirit in our 
hearts. A revelation being thus given to us once for all in 
the Scriptures, we should not grasp after new revelations, as 
do fanatics and enthusiasts. Such invented revelations 
Calvin regards as machinations of Satan, who transforms 
himself into an angel of liglit. Scripture, as the organ of 


the Spirit, is the depository of the knowledge of God, or, 
more particularly, of the Triune God. God created man 
good, but by the sin of Adam sin was entailed upon us, his 
descendants. Calvin apprehends original or hereditary sin 
in a strictly Augustinian sense. He regards it not simply as 
a disease, an infirmity (as does Zvvingle), but as a total per- 
version of human nature. He rejects the mild views of the 
Church fathers who preceded Augustine, and who attribute a 
remnant of liberty to fallen man, and teaches, with Augustine, 
and also with Luther and Melanchthon, that man has by the 
sin of Adam lost all liberty. In the very first edition of the 
Institutes, it is declared that not one spark of good can be 
found in the natural man from his head to his feet. Every- 
thing worthy of praise that appears in him is a work of 
grace. Our salvation is dependent solely upon the mercy 
of God, and not upon our worthiness. Man must, however, 
lay hold upon divine grace by faith. Calvin is as far as 
Melanchthon from accepting as faith mere historic belief, 
which, he declares, deserves not the name of faith, it being 
the faith which devils have. True faith is true trust {fiducia). 
Whatsoever proceeds not from faith is sin ; hence Calvin 
regards the virtues of the heathen as brilliant vices. But 
faith itself is a gift from above. Man must needs be born 
again, and of this new birtli only the elect are made par- 
takers. The doctrine of election was further developed by 
Calvin at a subsequent period, but its fundamental features 
appear in the first edition of the Institutes. It forms one of 
the chief elements of the Calvinistic system. This doctrine, 
which teaches that from pure grace God gives to one what He 
denies to another, is intended to humble the pride of man. 
We must bow before the will of God, which we are not able 
to resist. The question whether God be the author of evil, 
Calvin calls both difficult and involved {diffixilis et involitta). 
He seeks to solve it by making a distinction between the 
will and the command of God. The evil which takes place 
in the world is accomplished in accordance with the wdll of 


God, but it does not occur at His command. In a certain 
sense, even the fall of Adam may be regarded as an event 
of divine ordering. As there are vessels of the glory of God, 
there are also vessels of His wrath, and both exist from a 
divine necessity. But even the damnation of the wicked 
must conduce to the glorification of God. 

The doctrine of the Church, like the doctrine of Election, 
occupies an important place in Calvin's system. We have 
already seen, in the dedication of the Institutes to Francis I., 
that he distinguishes between a visible and an invisible 
Church. To Calvin, however, the Cluirch is not merely the 
communion of the elect, but, in respect of its external form, 
it is a divine sanative institution [Ilcilsanstalt], which man 
in his natural rudeness and indolence requires. " The Church 
is our mother," is the doctrine of Calvin as well as of the 
Eoman Catholic Church, and he who will not liear the Church 
must be regarded as a publican and heathen. Only (and 
herein consists the difference between Calvin's view and the 
( view of the Eomish Church) the word, according to Calvin, 
is not bound to the Church, but ratlier the Church is bound 
to the word of God. Furthermore, he does not regard the 
Church as consisting in the mass of the priests, as a body 
distinct from the laity, but, like Luther, Calvin supports the 
tenet that every true Christian is a priest of God. Hence 
the Calvinistic system accords to the so-called laity a share 
in the representation and government of the Church, and the 
exercise of ecclesiastical discipline. The Church thus ap- 
pointed has the right to enact laws through its synods, and to 
exercise ecclesiastical discipline through its presbyteries and 
consistories. Its modes of discipline are, however, of a 
spiritual character. It is inadmissible to confound spiritual 
and secular government. While the State pursues earthly 
aims, the Church is intent upon heavenly things. It is, 
nevertheless, the bounden duty of the State to protect the 
Church with the arm of secular authority, and to aid her in 
the attainment of her purposes. Hence the State should 



take measures against blasphemy. (We shall see what prac- f 
tical application Calvin makes of this theory.) v 

The sacraments are regarded by Calvin not as mere signs, ^ 
by which we make known that we belong to Christ (" tokens I 
of allegiance/' as Zwingle calls them), but, moreover, as I 
visible i^ledges of God's favour towards us, instituted for the 
strengthening of our weak faith.^ They are seals, Calvin 
declares, — remarking further that a seal, considered in and 
by itself, apart from the document to which it is affixed, is 
valueless and insignificant ; and yet, when attached to that 
document, it serves to strengthen and confirm the same. 
From this it will appear that the Lord's Supper is to Calvin 
more than a mere memorial repast. Indeed, Zwingle's view 
of the Eucharist seemed to him profane. Calvin celebrates 
therein a real union of Christ with the soul of the believer 
{vinculum caritatis). He, however, differed from Luther in that 
he did not look for Christ's presence in the bread, but assumed 
that a mediatory operation of the Hoi}'- Spirit takes place. 
Christ does not come down from heaven into the bread, he 
declares, any more than the sun comes from heaven to warm 
us and give us light. The orb of day diffuses its heat and its 
illuminating rays directly from heaven. Calvin, like Zwingle, 
denies that the unbelieving partake of the body of Christ. 
The difference between the Zwinglian and the Calvinistic 
view is a relative difference, to which reference will be made 
on some future occasion. It is needless to say that Calvin, 
in common with the other Reformers, repudiated the external 
veneration of the sacrament of the altar, the worship of the 
host, and the sacrifice of the mass. 

The printing of this work, which excels every previous 
achievement in the domain to which it belongs, was not 
completed when Calvin quitted Basel. He repaired to 
Ferrara, in Italy, to the court of the young Duchess Eonee, 

^ The following occurs in the very first edition of the Institutes : — " Sacramen- 
tum est signum externum, quo bonam suam erga nos voluutatem Dominus nobis 
reprgesentat ac testificatur, ad sustineudam fidei uostrse imbeciliitateiu. " 



the wife of Hercules d'Este. In the neighbourhood of this 
lady, who was a daughter of Louis xii. of France, many 
Protestants made their abode. Here, also, he introduced 
himself under the name of Charles d'Espeville. He con- 
ducted the religious meetings held by the Protestants at this 
place, and even after leaving Ferrara maintained an epistolary 
correspondence with the duchess, wlio always regarded him 
as a chosen vessel of the Lord. It has been stated that 
Calvin visited Aosta in Piedmont, on his return from Ferrara.^ 
He sojourned, it is said, at a certain farm-house (the Granrjc 
de Bibian), whence, when persecution threatened, he escaped 
with two companions ; the mountain pass which he traversed 
in his journey into the Valais is said still to bear the name 
of " Calvin's Window." "^ The authenticity of these state- 
ments has, however, been called in (j^uestion. Whatever may 
be the truth in regard to them, it is certain that after leaving 
Italy, Calvin returned to France. He was not, however, 
permitted to remain there. " I am driven," he writes, " from 
the land of my birth : every step which I take toward a 
foreign country costs me tears ; yet so let it be. If Truth 
merit not a dwelling-place in France, neither will I abide 
there. I will accept the lot which falls to her share." It 
was his intention to repair to Germany in company with his 
brother Antony, and to visit Basel and Strassburg on the 
way ; but, as the country was swarming with soldiers (by 
reason of the war which had broken out between Charles v. 
and Francis i.), instead of taking the direct road through 
Lorraine, he made a circuit through Savoy and thus arrived 
at Geneva. There, as he himself confesses, he was detained 
by the hand of God ; for no sooner had Farel learned of his 
presence through Du Tillet, than he sought liim out and con- 

^ Jules Bonnet, Calvin au ml d'Aoste {Bulhthi de la socletd de I'ldsto'ire du 
Protestantisme fran^ais, ix. p. 160). 

2 In witness of the tiuth of this statement, reference is made to a moninnent 
prected in the market-place at Aosta in tlic year 1541, which, having become 
weather-beaten and faded, has in modern times been repeatedly touched up (in 
1741 and 1841). 

Calvin's labours at geneva. 313 

jured him, as he valued his salvation, to remain in Geneva 
and assist in the work of Reformation. Calvin at first 
endeavoured to excuse himself, stating that he was desirous 
of quietly pursuing his studies. Then, however, Farel 
addressed him, prophet-like, in the following terms: — "I declare 
to thee on the part of God, that if thou refuse to labour with 
us here in God's work. He will curse thee ; for in pleading 
thy studies as an excuse for abandoning us, thou seekest thy- 
self more than God." Farel's words were productive of the 
intended effect. Calvin resolved to remain in Geneva, and 
in September 1536, at the age of twenty-seven, accepted the 
situation of teacher provisionally assigned him. After Calvin 
had delivered one lecture in St. Peter's Cathedral, Farel 
appeared before the council and petitioned that a pecuniary 
allowance might be made which would enable Calvin to con- 
tinue his lectures ; the latter also assisted Farel in preaching,^ 
and was soon afterwards formally appointed pastor. Calvin's 
relation to Farel might be compared with the relation of 
Melanchthon to Luther, were it not for the fact that the 
relative greatness of the parties is reversed. Despite the 
difference in their natures, Calvin and Farel laboured together 
in perfect harmony. " We were one heart and one soul, 
Calvin himself declares. Calvin immediately took a decided 
stand in reference to everything relating to public morals. 
In this he was supported by the civil authorities. It has 
been shown that strict prohibitions against cursing and 
blaspheming, against games of chance, masquerades, dances, 
magnificence in dress, etc., had been issued by the Genevan 
Government previous to the time of which w^e speak, indeed 
as early as the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth 
century, and that Calvin, consequently, cannot be regarded as 
the originator of such laws. It was under his influence, how- 

' In tlie minntes of the Council, under date 5tli September 1536, appears the 
following : — "Farel a expose que cette le9on, que ce Fran9ais donne en St. Pierre, 
est necessaire." And again in February 1537: "On donne six ecus d'or h 
Cauvin, soit Calvin, vu, qu'il n'a encore gueres recu. " 


ever, that these prohibitions were renewed, and enforced, it 
may be, with additional severity. It cannot fail to strike 
us, in these modern days, as strange, when we read that a 
dressmaker was sentenced to three days' imprisonment for 
excess in the ornamentation of a bride, and that, furthermore, 
the mother of the bride and two friends who had assisted in 
attiring the young woman, and had accompanied her to cliurch, 
were all subjected to the same penalty. And not only to ^ts 
must it appear strange ; Luther, from the standpoint which 
he occupied, would also have disapproved of so rigorous a 
proceeding. We know how liberal his views were in regard 
to such matters. On another occasion, a gambler was put in 
the pillory, a pack of cards being hung around his neck. 
Justice requires, however, that we should mention, that in 
addition to the strict prohibitions referred to, very wholesome 
injunctions were issued in regard to education, among other 
things. Parents who did not send their children to school 
were fined, and if that punishment proved of no avail, their 
names were stricken from the list of burghers. In company 
with Farel, Calvin prepared an ecclesiastical constitution, 
which was sworn to by the burghers on the 20th November 
1536, and publicly read every Sunday. 

From Geneva, Calvin extended his influence over the 
neighbouring district of Vaud, whicli was then under the 
government of Bern. In Vaud the Keformation was not yet 
firmly established. The lords of Bern, who had shortly before 
taken possession of the territory, now consummated the Kefor- 
mation with a mighty hand. On the 1st of October 1536, a 
disputation took place in the cathedral at Lausanne, Farel, 
Viret, Calvin, and a certain Peter Caroli being the speakers on 
the Evangelical side. A Franciscan who was present laid aside 
the dress of his order, declaring that thenceforth he would recog- 
nise no other head than the Lord Christ. Caroli and Viret 
were tlie first Ileformed pastors of Lausanne. The academy was 
revived, and in the first days of the year 1 5 3 7 an edict establish- 
in !]r the lleformation in the land of Vaud ^^'as issued from Bern. 

Calvin's labours at geneva. 315 

A time of trial and conflict now arrived for Calvin. The 
Anabaptists gave him trouble, in the first place, but were 
vanquished by him in a public disputation. He next became 
involved in a controversy with Caroli, who was a puffed-up 
and contentious man. He had been a doctor of the Sorbonne, 
but had joined the Evangelical party in Paris, and had become 
acquainted with Farel and Viret. After preaching for a time 
in Neuchatel, he had, as was previously stated, been appointed 
pastor at Lausanne, together with Viret. But the old 
Scholastic leaven now began to work again in the late doctor 
of the Sorbdnne. He affirmed that prayer should be offered ( 
for the dead, and that the saints should be invoked. He 
accused Calvin and the rest of the Genevan theologians of 
Arianism, because they did not attach the same value as him- 
self to the Scholastic definitions of the doctrine of the Trinity 
[Dreieinigkeit], and avoided the use of the un-biblical expres- 
sions " person," " trinity," and the like. Caroli demanded 
that the Genevans should sign the three ancient oecumenical 
Confessions of Faith,^ This, however, they refused to do, not 
because they had any quarrel with the contents of these creeds, . 
but because they preferred not to place their necks beneath any 
yoke of the letter. By order of the Bernese Government, a 
synod was held in Lausanne, which Calvin attended. Caroli 
was defeated, censured as a slanderer, and compelled to leave 
the territories of Bern. Chagrined at his defeat, his old t 
sympathies revived ; he went to Eome and returned to the i 
bosom of the ancient Church. 

Calvin's period of conflict was, however, not yet over. A 
storm now arose in Geneva. There had long existed a party . 
to which the strictness of Calvin, whose severity was shared i 
by Farel and Courault (Corualdus), was anything but agree- 
able. Courault, who was a blind preacher, even surpassed 

^ The so-called Apostolic Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the so-called Athan- 
asian Creed, all of which the Lutheran Church placed at the head of its sym- 
bolical books. In regard to the so-called Athanasian Creed (Qukunque), Calvin > 
declared plainly that the ancient Church, to which it was attributed, would ( 
never have assented to it. See Henry, i. pp. ISO and ISl. 


the other two in liarshness. Tlie disaffected party now sought 
an opportunity to vex their burdensome censors and thus to 
(h'ive them to extreme measures. This opportunity was 
speedily found. Before tlie arrival of Calvin, Farel liad 
radically done away with the traditional forms of worship. 
He had abolished not only the altar and images, but also the 
baptismal font, and had substituted ordinary leavened bread 
for unleavened bread in the Lord's Supper. With the excep- 
tion of Sunday, as the " Lord's Day," lie had stricken out all 
holidays from the ecclesiastical calendar — not only the days 
which were devoted to the commemoration of the Virgin, but 
also Christmas and Ascension Day. In the Bernese Church, 
to which the Church of Lausanne now belonged, the baptismal 
fonts were left standing, unleavened bread was used in the 
celebration of the Eucharist (as was the case in Zurich also), 
and besides Sunday, the feasts of the Annunciation, Christmas, 
and Ascension were observed. The Bernese, who desired 
uniformity in the usages of the churches, made their dis- 
pleasure at the existing differences known to the Genevan 
Government, and the latter demanded that Calvin and Farel 
should conform to the Bernese ritual. Both preachers refused 
to comply with this requisition, wishing at least to wait until 
a synod, which was announced to meet at Zurich, should 
decide upon the question. Their refusal was ill received, 
being regarded as an instance of culpable obstinacy and dis- 
obedience to the Government. The preachers were forbidden 
to enter the pulpit. They, however, disregarded the prohibition, 
on the ground that it is right to obey God rather than man ; 
and it must be confessed that the passionate language which 
they (especially Courault) made use of in the pulpit, was not 
always worthy of that sacred place, nor was it in any wise 
adapted to conciliate the hearer. Judicious men — among 
them some who belonged to other churches, as, for instance, 
Grynieus of Basel — had in vain enjoined moderation upon 
tlie indignant preacliers. The people were in a state of the 
utmost excitement. There was ra'aiici; and reviling in the 

Calvin's banishment from geneva. .317 

taverns. Some threatened to throw Calvin into the Ehone, 
and others announced their determination to shoot him. 
Scurrilous writings were circulated. Processions of masqueraders 
paraded the streets, scoffing at the Eeformers and deriding, at 
the same time, much that was sacred. All this took place 
at the holy season of Easter. Farel ascended the pulpit in 
the church of St. Gervais, and proclaimed that under existing 
circumstances it would be impossible for him to celebrate 
the Communion, as every condition requisite for a proper 
participation in it was lacking, viz. faith, love, repentance. 
Calvin pursued the same course at St. Peter's. On the 23d 
of April 1538, a meeting of the citizens was held, in con- 
sequence of which the now odious preachers were commanded 
to leave the city within forty-eight hours. When Calvin 
received the decree, he remarked firmly and calmly : " Well ! 
if we had been the servants of men, we would now be ill 
repaid ; but we serve a great Master, who never lets those 
who serve Him go unrewarded, and who even pays them 
what He does not owe them." He left the city, accompanied 
by Farel. Courault had been previously imprisoned, and 
after his discharge was also sent into exile. Soon after the 
banishment of these three, Antoine Saunier, school inspector 
of Geneva, was also compelled to leave the city. Calvin and 
Farel repaired to Bern, for the purpose of complaining of the 
wrong which had been done them, and of vindicating their 
own behaviour. They again expressed their willingness to 
submit to the decrees of the Synod of Zurich. They also 
attended the Synod in person, and endeavoured to bring about 
an understanding in regard to the matter with which they 
were concerned. They even confessed that in their zeal they 
might occasionally have overstepped the bounds of moderation. 
Their statements at least made manifest the fact that it was 
not a spirit of obstinate persistence in their own way which 
had induced them to resist the commands of the Genevan 
Government. They had been unwilling to concede to the 
latter the right to impose usages of worship upon the Church. 


The Bernese thereupon entered into negotiations with Geneva, 
in the hope of effecting a repeal of the decree in question. 
The hostile party, however, succeeded, at the eleventh hour, 
in frustrating this endeavour on the part of Bern, and the 
decree was adhered to. " What, then, became of the banished 
preachers ? " it will be asked. Courault, for the few days 
which still remained to him on earth, was appointed pastor 
at Orbe. Farel, after accompanying Calvin to Basel, accepted 
a call to Neuchatel, where, with few interruptions, he spent 
the remainder of his years.^ Calvin went from Basel to 
Strassburg, having, through the instrumentality of Bucer, 
received a call to the latter place. Like the impetuous Farel 
at Geneva, peace-loving Bucer pressed this call home upon 
Calvin when the latter hesitated to accept it, assuring him 
that it was a divine summons, which it would be perilous to 
decline, and enforcing his admonition with a reference to the 
prophet Jonah and his mission to Nineveh. Calvin accepted 
the call, and became pastor of the considerable congregation 
of French refugees (it is estimated that they numbered about 
1500) to whom the church of St. Nicholas had been ceded. 
He was also speedily enabled to deliver theological lectures, 
tlie council granting him a small stipend. Here, in the " New 
Jerusalem," as Strassburg was called at this time, Calvin im- 
mediately became associated in friendly intimacy with Bucer, 
Capito, Hedio, Niger, and J. Sturm. From here he visited, as we 
have already seen, the religious conferences of Frankfort and 
Hagenau, of Worms and Eegensburg, on one of which occasions 
he made the acquaintance of Melanchthon.^ Thus, also, he 
became familiar with German theology and the circumstances 
of the German Church. His connection witli the great teacher 
of Germany continued until the death of the latter, although 
their dispositions were very different, and Calvin could not 
repress the idea that Melauchtlion was sometimes too yielding. 

^ He laboured for a time in Metz and its vicinity, and also spent some time 
among the "Waldenses. He died 13th Septenibur 1565, at tlie age of seventy- 
six, after having married late in life. 

^ At the Conference of Worms. 



Calvin, soon after his settlement in Strassburg, followed the 
example of other Eeformers, and married. His heart was 
won by a widow, Idelette de Bures of Guelders. Her former 
husband, John Storder of Liege, had been an Anabaptist, but 
was converted from his error by Calvin. Beza speaks of this 
lady as a discreet and honourable woman.^ The marriage t 
took place in September 1540. Of this union, which lasted 
for only ten years, at the end of which period Calvin's wife 
died, one son was the only issue, and he lived but for a short 
time. " The Lord gave me a son," writes Calvin, " and He 
hath taken him away again ; let them (my adversaries) regard 
my affliction as a disgrace, if it please them so to do. Cannot 
I count my sons by tens of thousands throughout the Christian 
world ? " In like manner, Epaminondas once remarked that 
he would leave behind him two immortal daughters, his 
victories at Leuctra and Mantinea. And, in truth, in Calvin's 
case, it is useless for us to seek for those interesting features 
of a genial family life which attract us in the life of Luther. 
The former, grand and imposing in character, did not belong 
to the contracted sphere of home — he was the property of the 
Church ; nor did he belong to a secluded provincial or national 
church, like Zwingle, but to the ideal Church of God, scattered 
throughout the world. To labour for the Church, to hazard 
all for her, to merge his life in hers, was his vocation. He 
was a Christian cosmopolitan in the noblest sense of the word. 
And yet, cosmopolite though he was, he did not forget his 
Genevan Church, to which he had first been sent in the 
providence of God. Even during his stay in Strassburg, he 
watched over it most attentively. He was in constant cor- 
respondence with the friends who had continued faithful to 
him, whom he exhorted not to return evil for evil, but to 
overcome evil with good, in obedience to the apostle's com- 
mand. He at this time himself advised submission in regard 
to external points of worship. 

Calvin did not abandon his literary labours while at Strass- 
^ Gravis honestaque fenilna. 



burg. He prepared a second edition of the Institutes, placing 
on the title-page of tlie copies which were intended for France 
the disguised name of Alcuiu. It was here also that he 
wrote his celebrated Commentary on the Epistle to the 
Romans^ and his treatise on the Lord's Supper ; the latter 
work was originally written in French, and afterwards trans- 
lated into Latin. Luther, who was strongly prejudiced against 
everything that Howed from the pen of Zwingle, expressed 
his satisfaction with the treatises of Calvin." 

Calvin's absence from Geneva had meanwhile been utilized 
by the Eomish party in an endeavour to entice the Genevese 
back into the old Church. Cardinal James Sadolet, bishop of 
Carpentras in the county of Avignon,^ an important dignitary 
in the Eomish Church, and, moreover, a man of great piety 
and noble character, in the year 1539 addressed himself to 
the senate and people of Geneva in a well-written epistle, in 
which he strove to win his " dearly-beloved brethren in 
Christ " back to Eome. The council was thereby plunged 
in no little embarrassment. What could it oppose to the 
arguments of the clever rhetorician and dialectician ? It was 
a case in which there was need of the pen of a Calvin, who 
alone was sufficient for such an opponent. Accordingly, the 
cardinal's letter was transmitted to Calvin, with the request 
that he would answer it. This Calvin did in a masterly 
manner. While he recognised the talents of his opponent, 
he pointed out to him tliat his letter contained a greater 
amount of dazzling rhetoric than of sound theology, and 
refuted his arguments with cogent reasoning. He concluded 

' Tills is not the place lor a particular examination into the merits of Calvin 
as an interpreter of Scripture. We will hut remark that an important exegetical 
authority (Prof. E. Reuss of Strassburg) calls Calvin the greatest exegete of his 
century. Comp. also Tiioluck, Litter. Anzeiger fur christlkhe Tlieologen for 
the year 1831. 

'^ In a letter to M. Bucer, of 14th Octoher 1539, Luther sent greetings to 
Sturm and Calvin, stating that he had read the writings {libdlos) of the latter 
with singular pleasure {sinijulurivohqdatc). See De "Wette, v. No. 1884. 

=* Comp. on Sadolet, NeudeckeuVs article in Herzog's Bealenc. xiii. pp. 297 sqq. 
His letter and Calvin's answer arc to be found in vol. v. of the Strassburg 
edition of the Reformer's works. 


his reply with the desire that the Lord might open the 
cardinal's eyes to the true unity of the Church, as based only 
upon Christ, His word, and His Spirit. This answer was 
heartily approved by Luther, and Melanchthon was able to 
write to Strassburg that Calvin " was higher in favour " at 
Wittenberg. The Genevese now began to see more and more 
clearly that they stood in immediate and urgent need of the 
very man whom they had so shamefully banished. The 
storm, which had continued for some time after Calvin's 
departure from Geneva, was now at an end.^ The people, or 
at least a large proportion of them, clamorously demanded 
his recall. The council therefore' despatched a letter to 
Calvin, which he received in Worms during his attendance 
upon the conference there assembled. Calvin's first answer 
to this appeal was a declinature. " There is," he wrote to 
a friend, " no place in the world which I so much dread as 
Geneva." His consent to return was at last won by the 
united entreaties of Farel, Viret, and Bucer, the last of whom 
pled against his own interests,^ and the representations of 
a formal embassy from Geneva. For a time, however, he 
limited the period of his promised sojourn in that city to 
two years. He also affixed strict conditions to his return. 
" If you would have me in your city," was his message to 
the magistrate, "you must abolish the prevailing sins of 
Geneva. If you are sincere in recalling me, banish the vices 
in company with which I cannot dwell within your walls. I 
cannot live in the same place with a church whose discipline 
is in ruins, and where audacity in evil-doing prevails un- 
punished. Not the pope, not tyrants who rage only outside 
of the Church — no ! sensuality, gluttony, perjury, and the 

' The party of the GulUermins (thus the adherents of Guillaume Farel were 
styled), and consequently of the Reformation, had vanquished the Archichaux 
(literally, Articulants, so called from the articles which they put forth). The 
head of the latter party, the Syndic and Captain-general Jean Philippe, had been 
executed in punishment of his acts of violence. Since his fall, Calvin's recall 
had been certain (Kampschulte, p. 365). 

^ Bucer again referred him to Jonah. The Swiss cities of Zurich, Bern, and 
Basel also wrote to Calvin urging his return. 


322 HISTORY OF the keformation. 

like, Climes that publicly contradict my doctrine and darken 
the Church inwardly, are the arch-enemies of the gospel. 
What avails it to keep off the wolves that attack from 
witliout, if the flock be wasted and destroyed by pestilence 
Mdthin ! " ^ On the 13th of September 1541, Calvin entered 
Geneva amid the acclamations of the people. The council 
immediately conferred with him, in the hope of gaining from 
him a promise of permanent abode in the city. Among other 
things, it presented him with cloth for a new coat. The 
Strassburgers, however, expressed their unwillingness to re- 
linquish all claim to the man whom they had learned to 
•esteem and love. Considerable negotiation was requisite for 
the settlement of this difficulty, which was at last terminated 
by the Strassburgers presenting to him the right of honorary 
citizenship, and proposing to continue his salary, which latter 
offer he declined. He now established himself in Geneva, in 
the dwelling assigned him in the neighbourhood of St. Peter's 
{Paic dcs Chanoincs)^- and again entered upon the duties of 
pastor and professor of theology. 

' MuLLER, Reliquien, iv. p. 114. Comp. Henry, i. pp. 385 sqq. ; Staiielin, 
i. pp. 313 sqq. 

^ Calvin's salary was fixed at 500 liorins and some additional payment in 
produce. He received five times as much as was drawn by a syndic. This 
salary cannot be thought extravagant, however, even from a modern point of 
view, when we consider that it was necessary for him to expend much for 
charitable purposes, especially in the entertainment of strangers j)assing through 
Geneva ; and this fact is alleged as the motive for so large an allowance in the 
protocol of the council. 


Calvin's second appearance at geneva ■ — ecclesiastical 
discipline and divine worship ordinances con- 
troversy with sebastian castellio — the libertines 






CALVIN'S proceedings at Geneva have been variously 
apprehended and represented. He has been called the 
" Lycurgus of Geneva ; " he has been compared to a Roman 
dictator, to a pope such as Gregory vii. or Innocent ill., and 
even to an oriental caliph.^ An influence over the Genevan 
Government has been ascribed to him that would cause the 
latter to appear as the mere tool of his hierarchical passion. 
According to some accounts, it would seem that, like the 
Olympian Jupiter, he had merely to nod, and the whole earth 
trembled. Such exac^serated statements have been reduced to 
their proper level by modern investigation." It has been 
proved that not only in political affairs, but even in 
ecclesiastical matters, the civil authorities of Geneva insisted 
jealously upon their rights, and reserved to themselves the 

' Maimbourg, Histoire du Cahbmme, i. p. 114. 

^ Am^dee Roget, L'eglise et V6tat a Geneve du vivant de Calvin, etude 
d'histoire politico - ecclesiastique, Geneva, 1867 (also in the Blbliolhdque 
universelle of 1865). Comp. also Hundeshagen, Ueher den Elnjluss den 
Calvinismus aiif die Ideen von Staat und staatubUrgerlicher Freiheit, Bern, 

324 msTOEY OF the kefoiimation, 

prerogative of final decision ; and that there were not lacking 
instances when their opinions conflicted with those of the 
Consistory. It is a fact, nevertheless, that a theocracy — not 
in the Eoman Catholic, but in the old biblical sense of the 
word — was one of Calvin's ideals, one which he endeavoured 
to realize by all the means that he regarded as legitimate. 
What he desired above all things to promote was, not his 
own glory, not the glory of the priestly individual or class, 
but the glory of God. In the entertainment of this theocratic 
longing, he sympathized with the world-historic ideas of the 
better popes of the Middle Ages, though with a difference, as 
we have already intimated. And thus, aiming too high, at an 
object which from its very nature is unattainable for humanity, 
it happened that Calvin, like the popes to whom we have re- 
ferred, in the choice of means frequently overstepped the bounds 
of sagacious secular policy as well as of judicious theology. 

We have already demonstrated the fact that Calvin him- 
self entertained exalted ideas of his mission, that he felt 
himself to be called by God and placed by Him in those 
situations which he filled. He compared himself not merely 
to minor prophets, such as Jonah, but also to David, the great 
prophet-king ; for as the latter w\as called away from his flock 
to the highest dignity which the kingdom afforded, in like 
manner, Calvin felt, did God draw Mm forth from indigence 
and obscurity, and entrust him with the lionourable office of a 
herald and minister of the gospel.^ And who can wonder 
that he recognised the higher hand of God in liis recall to 
Geneva after so many conflicts ? Nay, more, must not this 
unquestioning faith in his higher mission be regarded as the 
determinative principle of all his subsequent actions ? As 
part of his welcome to Geneva, there was a general celebra- 
tion of the Lord's Supper — a feast of reconciliation, as it were. 
Days of repentance and prayer were set apart in every week 
for the invocation of the lielp and favour of God upon Geneva 

^ See the preface to his Commentarii on the Psalms ; comp. Kampschultk, 
p. 221. 


and its church. Agreeably to Calvin's wishes, a strict 
ecclesiastical and moral discipline now^began to be exercised 
by the Consistory. Cursing, swearing, drinking, neglect of 
attendance upon the public worship of God, dancing and other 
amusements, among them some that are now universally 
regarded as innocent, were severely censured. If, notwith- 
standing this, there were some who engaged in any of the 
misdemeanours above mentioned, such offenders were excluded 
from the Lord's Supper ; no civil penalty, however, was 
inflicted upon them. The ordinances of divine worship were 
regulated. There was preaching in every church twice on 
Sunday ; ^ the arrangement, however, was such that the 
pastors circulated in the different churches, as the whole city 
constituted but one congregation — a custom which was retained 
in Geneva till the present day."^ It was directed that the 
Lord's Supper should be celebrated four times during the 
year — on Easter-day, Whitsunday, Christmas (or rather on the 
Sunday nearest to Christmas, that day not being observed as 
a special festival), and on the first Sunday in September. 
Children were not admitted to the Lord's Supper, but were 
obliged to attend upon the course of instruction specially 
designed for them until the time of their admission to the 
Eucharist. Instruction was imparted to the children during 
the noon hour on every Sunday. Calvin, who previously had 
written a catechism in a dogmatical form, now issued a 
second, different from the first, being arranged in questions 
and answers. This catechism has not the genial and artless 
simplicity of either the Lutheran or the CEcolampadian cate- 
chism, but, like everything else which flowed from the pen of 
Calvin, it is remarkable for its theological thoroughness and 
solidity.^ The form of worship observed in the Genevese 

^ Preaching was, however, not confined to Sundays. Numerous sermons 
were delivered during the week, and there was no day on which public worship 
was not celebrated. 

* BUNGENER, p. 209. 

^ Both catechisms, and also the litui'gy {Forme des prieres eccUsiastiques), 
are to be found in vols. v. and vi. of the new edition of Calvin's works. 


Church, witli all its simplicity, — nay, on account of that very 
quality, — was solemn and impressive. It had the appearance 
of proceeding from a congregation of Christians permeated 
and upborne by the pure truth of the divine word, and 
needing no external incentive to devote themselves whole- 
heartedly to the service of the living God. The standing 
prayer was of a penitential character ; in some of the Reformed 
churches it is still used every Sunday, and is to be found in 
their service-books. The singing, which was restricted to the 
time preceding and immediately subsequent to the sermon, 
was conducted with solemn monotony, in heavy, long-drawn 
notes. The Psalms constituted the only material for this 
part of the service. In this particular, the Genevese Church 
presented a striking contrast to the Lutheran Church, with its 
wealth and variety of song. 

The prescripts relating to divine worship were, however, 
not confined to the public celebration thereof in the sanctuary. 
It was intended that every house should be a house of prayer, 
a church in miniature, a household of God. The ministers, 
who were chosen by the churches, composed, in their totality, 
the " Venerable Company " ( VdniraUe Compagnie). It was 
their duty, in conjunction with the elders, diligently to visit 
every house, and, when it seemed necessary, to examine the 
inmates in the catechism, and to investigate the religious and 
moral condition of families generally. Distinct from the 
Venerable Company was the Consistory, a court composed of 
the clergy and lay elders, whose duty it was energetically to 
execute ecclesiastical discipline. The work of this body 
Calvin regarded as the veritable sinew and essential substance 
of ecclesiastical life. 

On the 9th of November 1541, the "Ecclesiastical 
Ordinances " were ratified by the Council of Two Hundred, 
and on the 20th of the same month were adopted by the 
people without any objection. Finally, on the 2d of 
January 1542, the ecclesiastical fundamental law of the state 
was most solemnly proclaimed to the people, who had been 


assembled by the blowing of trumpets and the pealing of the 
great bell. The execution of the law led, it is true, to fresh 
difficulties and complications, which it is not our purpose to 
discuss. Earnestly as Calvin at first strove after moderation 
in his personal conduct, — and that he did thus strive, even 
his opponents must acknowledge, — although he laid all 
possible restraint upon himself, doing \iolence, in many 
respects, to his own nature, and besought of God the gift of 
gentleness and patience, a number of unpleasant encounters 
ensued. Persons who objected to sacrificing their indepen- 
dence of thought and action, and who were not ready to adhere 
in every particular to Calvin and his programme of reform, 
easily incurred peril of expulsion from the city as disturbers 
of the public order, if haply they escaped severer punishment. 
Proceedings were instituted against a number of individuals, 
who were made to experience the punitive severity of " Master 
Calvin " and " the seigniors of the Consistory." 

Among these sufferers we mention first Sebastian Castellio 
(Chatillon, or really Chateillon).^ He was born in the year 
1515, in Savoy according to some accounts, while others 
mention Dauphiny as his birth-place.^ His parents were poor 
but honest people.'^ Sebastian was possessed of unusual gifts, 
and, in particular, of an extraordinary facility in acquiring 
languages. He studied in Lyons at first, and afterwards at 
Strassburg, at which place he was for a time an inmate of the 
same house with Calvin. Through the influence of the latter, 
he obtained the position of regent of the College at Geneva. 
He was an out-and-out philologist, even in his study of 
theology, and was unable to elevate himself to the grand views 
of Calvin. He met the speculative dogmatism of the latter 

' In allusion to the Castalian spring, he delighteJ to call himself Castallio. 
Comp. J. Mahly (1862). 

^ Mahly decides in favour of the latter place (p. 7). He derives from 
authentic documents the information that his Inrth-place was not Chatillon en 
Bi'esse, as is generally asserted, but Martin du Fresne, half a mile from Nantua. 

^ A favourite proverb in his father's house was, ' ' On rendre, on pendre, on 
les peines d'enfer attendre." 


^vith a simple and prosaic criticism that was quick to fasten 
upon details. Neither could Castellio accept the allegorical 
interpretation of the Song of Solomon, by which the love 
relations set forth in the Canticle are viewed as a mystical 
glorification of Christ and His relation to the Church. The 
philological Humanist beheld nothing in this inspired book 
save an erotic poem in the oriental style. And even from 
this human point of view he had no appreciation whatever of 
the tender beauties of the poem. He regarded it as " a carnal 
love -song," as Hottinger expresses it, or, as Calvin tells us, as 
an obscene and lascivious poem, in which Solomon gave 
expression to his impure love.^ He therefore desired to have 
it expunged from the canon of the sacred writings. Such 
an inconsiderate criticism and condemnation of a biblical 
book necessarily and justly excited indignation. In dogmatical 
things, also, the pedagogue ventured to differ from Calvin in 
opinion. Thus it was in the doctrine of Christ's descent into 
hell. Calvin's doctrine of election — a doctrine which has 
offended others beside Castellio — was the one with which he 
had least sympathy. Notwithstanding these differences, he 
believed himself warranted in using the good gifts with which 
God had endowed him in endeavouring to promote the glory 
of God. His philological ability was of advantage to him in 
his translations of the Bible into Latin and French. In his 
Latin translation he strove chiefly after an elegant and 
classical diction — a style which would at the same time be 
acceptable to the reading world of that day, and which would 
also recommend itself to the wits of the period. By the 
avoidance of so-called Hebraisms, however, much that is in 
the highest degree characteristic of the Bible was in great 
measure deprived of its force. The element of foreboding 
and mystery was lost in a language which conformed too 
perfectly to the speech of everyday life." Castellio sent 

' " Cai-men obsccenum et lasciviini, quo Salomo impiulicos suos amores 
descripserit. " 

- .Similar remarks will 3Li>i)]y to C.'astellio's translation of the Bible into French, 


proofs of this translation to Calvin ; the latter expressed him- 
self dissatisfied with the work, and afterwards, w'hen the 
Bible actually appeared, the Genevan clergy spoke of it in 
terms of abhorrence. In addition to all this, the school- 
master ventured on one occasion, in a discourse which he 
delivered before a meeting of the clergy, to contrast the 
Apostle Paul and the preachers of the gospel at Geneva, 
thereby causing the latter to appear in anything hut an 
advantageous light, and giving offence to many. Altogether, 
Calvin and his adherents considered that there were sufficient 
reasons to justify them in getting rid of so burdensome a 
man. Although he was not formally deprived of his situation, 
it was intimated to him, plainly enough, that his removal 
was desired, and admission to the ministry, which he had 
applied for, was denied him. On his withdrawal from the 
College, Calvin, in the name of the Genevan clergy, presented 
him with a testimonial, commendatory of his moral conduct 
and his high qualifications for educational service ; the 
Eeformer could not refrain, however, from referring to 
Castellio's theological heresies.^ Castellio, having thus lost 
his office, found it necessary to leave Geneva. Accompanied 
by his wife, four sons, and four daughters, he repaired to 
Basel, where, with the assistance of the noble bookseller 
Oporin, he contrived to gain a scanty subsistence.^ Finally, 
in 1553, he was appoined professor in ordinary of the Greek 
language at Basel. 

in which, for instance, he changes la cine d/u Seign&ur into fe souper, etc. 
Castellio was the forerunner of the modern translators of the Bible, a class 
which has had its representatives in Germany as well as elsewhere, 

' It may be mentioned, as a characteristic incident, that when, at the time of 
the plagne (1543), most of the Genevese clergy held back from service at the 
hospital, Castellio volunteered to visit the sick who were there, but his ofi'er was 
declined (whether on account of his heterodoxy or not, is not st-ated). See 
Kamfschulte, p. 685 ; Mahly, p. 16. According to Stahelin, p. 367, and 
others, Castellio's withdrawal from Geneva was voluntary. 

^ In company with other poor people he was sometimes occupied in drawing 
the driftwood, that floated into the Rhine from the Birs, out of the water, and 
selling it to the Government for a small sum. His opponents thereupon accused 
him of theft, and Castellio found it necessary publicly to vindicate himself from 
this charge. 



But the most serious contest in which Calvin became in- 
volved was waged against the party by him styled Libertines. 
Who, it may be asked, were these ? — a question which is 
susceptible of different answers. If, on the one hand, we 
credit exclusively the declarations of Calvin and his adherents, 
they were persons who resembled the old " Spirituals " of the 
Middle Ages; who, like some fanatics in Germany, used the word 
" spirit " improperly, and, under the pretence of spiritualizing 
Christianity, robbed it of its positive substance — being, in 
fact, disguised Pantheists and Indifferentists/ Possibly, such 
sentiments were accompanied by a corresponding life, which 
spurned the restraints of the law, and practically advocated 
the emancipation of the flesh. On the other hand, if we 
regard others, whose testimony is not to be rejected, and who, 
especially in modern times, have established themselves on the 
basis of an unprejudiced investigation of history, we find this 
odious name to have been conferred also upon a party which 
was opposed in general to the unlimited autliority of Calvin, 
and which, from its attachment to the Geneva of former days 
and the habits and customs thereof, strove in particular to 
resist the French influence. According to this view of the 
subject, tlie Libertines would correspond to the old " Con- 
federates " [Eidc/enossen], who formerly resisted the rule of the 
Mamelukes, and who at this time did not deny their Protestant 
sentiments, but whose Protestantism was not of the Calvinistic 
type. A distinction between religious and political Libertines 
has also been made.'^ Time may elucidate this whole subject 
still further. It may, however, already be assumed with suffi- 
cient certainty, that in the opposition formed against Calvin, 
there was a mingling of very different elements, some being 
of a noble, and others of a baser character. Instances of a 

1 The latter also appeared uiulcr the name of Nicodemites, a party which 
maintained that a man might be an Evangelical at heart and yet outwardly 
j)rol'ess the Catholic religion, just as Nicodemus was a secret adherent of the 
I^ord. These, also, were opposed by Calvin. 

2 See Hekzog, title "Calvin," Reakm. ii. p. 520; comp. also Tiikciisel, 
title " Libertiner," viii. pp. 375 sqij. 


similar sort have been found in all ages. In any case, Calvin's 
position was a difficult one, and all his greatness and Christian 
heroism were requisite to enable him to maintain his stand 
like a rock on which the surges dash and break. True, he 
exhibited his human fallibility by occasionally resorting to 
measures which we of the present day can scarcely reconcile 
with the fundamental Christian principles of his character, 
and far be it from us to deny that such was the fact. As has 
frequently been the case, however, in all ages of the world, 
the unbridled masses of the godless required no other reason 
for delighting to abuse so conspicuous a man, than that they 
found his moral greatness oppressive, his life of faith a vexation 
and folly, and his whole character and conduct a thorn in the 
flesh. These contemptible enemies of Calvin even went to tlie 
length of naming their dogs after the hated minister, besides 
perpetrating a variety of similar outrages. We will now 
proceed to a nearer view of other individuals with whom 
Calvin became involved in conflicts. 

Pierre Ameaux was, at the time of Calvin's rule in Geneva, a 
member of the Council of Two Hundred, of the smaller Council 
of Sixty, and of the Council of State, a captain of artillery^ 
and governor of the military munitions of the city. By 
occupation he was a manufacturer of playing-cards. He had 
professed adherence to the tenets of the Anabaptists. His 
wife having for some affence been condemned to a few days' 
imprisonment, Ameaux indulged in all manner of invectives 
against Calvin, calling him, for instance, a second pope and a 
tyrant. He was flned sixty thalers. Nor was Calvin content 
with this punishment. He demanded that Ameaux should make 
him the amende liononible, which was performed by the culprit, 
clad in the shirt of a penitent and holding in his hand a burn- 
ing torch, kneeling before the person whom he had offended 
and thus craving his pardon. This treatment of Ameaux occa- 
sioned much commotion among the people, and some stormy 
scenes ensued, which it is not our purpose to enlarge upon.^ 

' See Stahelin, i. p. 392. 



Ami Perrin, captain-general (commandant) of tlie city, was 
one of the men who had Ijcen instrumental in procuring the 
recall of Calvin, but who were afterwards unwilling to submit 
to his ecclesiastical discipline. Like Ameaux, he had a bad 
wife, a daughter of old Favre, who was himself one of Calvin's 
sworn enemies. This woman is described as " a perfect fury," 
capable of hurling all possible insults at Calvin, She, too^ 
M'as punished with imprisonment. The day succeeding tliat on 
wldch she was condemned, Calvin found upon his pulpit a 
paper in which he and his colleagues were threatened with 
death. This paper contained also some accusations of a 
political nature, charging Calvin with desiring to betray 
Geneva to France.^ Perrin was banished and his effigy was 
hanged on the gallows. 

Jacques Gruet was descended from a good family, and had 
formerly been a canon. Heavy charges were brought against 
him. He was accused not only of personal invectives against 
Calvin, although these also were laid to his charge, but, 
moreover, of outrageous blasphemies against the Founder of 
Christianity. In the summer of 1547 he had, by a public 
notice, threatened Calvin and his associates with death, 
alleging that it was wrong for the whole city to obey one 
melancholy man who was endeavouring to deprive the people 
of every pleasure. He had called Calvin a pope and a 
hypocrite. Similar insults were contained in a note which 
he laid upon the pulpit of the Eeformer. Nor was this all. 
In a book, which was not, indeed, discovered until after the 
death of Gruet (he having concealed it under the roof of his 
house), he called Christ a deceiver. A criminal process was 
instituted against this man. For a month he was subjected 
to torture, and on the 2Gth of June he died on tlie scaffold. 
The motives assigned for this severe sentence were not only 

' On tlicsc processes comp. Galliffe, Quelqucs pages d'histolre exacte soit les 
proces criminels intentes d Geneve en l.')47 2wur haute trahison contre Ami 
Perrin, ancien syndic, conseiller, et capitaine-geniral de la r^puhlique, et contre 
son accusateur Laurent Muijret, dlt le Magnijique, etc., 1862. 


that lie had spoken contemptuously of religion, that he had 
professed disregard for divine and human laws and styled 
them a work of human caprice, and that he had wished to ) 
overthrow the institutions of the Church, but also that he had i 
spoken ill of Calvin and his colleagues in the ministry. The / 
blasphemous book above referred to, having been discovered ^ 
in the place of its concealment, was burned by the public 

In the commencement of the sixth decade of the century, 
Calvin became involved in a vexatious conflict with Jerome 
Bolsec, formerly a Carmelite monk. A fugitive from the court 
of Ferrara in Italy, he had taken refuge at Geneva, where he 
turned his knowledge of medicine to account by practising as a 
physician. He believed himself called upon to oppose Calvin's 
doctrine of unconditional election, which he accordingly did 
with all possible decision. He laid before the Consistory a 
paper in which he declared the above-mentioned doctrine to 
be an error, and one more injurious than the errors of Papistry. 
The Consistory informed him that he must either abstain from 
meddling with theology and devote himself to his profession, 
or leave the city. Bolsec withdrew to Vevay (in the territory 
of Vaud), and thence continued his polemics. The Lausanne 
theologians, Viret and Beza, endeavoured to put a stop to his 
proceedings. A provincial synod of Vaud announced to him 
that it would no longer endure his " confusinfj nonsense." 
He thereupon returned to Geneva. Calvin's enemies now 
stationed themselves at his back and encouraged him to 
attack the Eeformer. On the 16th of October 1551, Bolsec 
attended the service of the congregation, in which, after the 
close of the sermon, every one present was at liberty to make 
some remarks. Andre Jusey preaclied, in agreement with 
Calvin's views, on the eighth chapter of John. Calvin himself 
was there, but not in his accustomed place, so that Bolsec 
thought him absent, and began accordingly to attack him in 
the most violent manner. He declared that there was nothing 
more impious and absurd than the doctrine of election; that 



any person who professed it, made God the author of sin and 
a very tyrant, taking pleasure in damning His creatures. He 
even boldly afiirmed that Augustine knew nothing of this 
doctrine, and that it was invented by Laurentius Valla (in the 
fourteenth century), thus exposing his gross ignorance. Calvin 
at this juncture emerged from his concealment, to the great 
terror of the speaker. It was easy for the Reformer to refute 
the statements of his opponent. Bolsec, who had nothing to 
reply, was arrested in the church, removed to prison, and at 
length banished from Geneva, being threatened with a cudgel- 
ling if he were ever found again on Genevan soil. The opinion 
of the other Swiss churches had been sought before the last 
measure was taken, as Bolsec had asserted that they were on 
his side. Such, indeed, was not the case ; they, however, 
disapproved of the manner in which he was treated. The 
Bernese had at first espoused the cause of Bolsec ; but Calvin 
wrote them a letter, in which he painted the erroneous teach- 
ings of the man in the darkest colours, and called him a 
deceiver, a faithless scoundrel, a destructive pest. Bolsec 
found an ally in the exiled Castellio. By this conflict with 
Bolsec, Calvin was induced to publish a special treatise on his 
doctrine on election of grace, already set forth less in detail 
in his Institutes} Twenty-six years later, thirteen years after 
Calvin's death, Bolsec took a mean revenge on the author of 
his banishment, by composing a libellous tractate, full of the 
most venomous calumnies against Calvin."^ 

But of all tlie controversial acts in Calvin's life, the one 
which has always excited tlie greatest interest is the process 
of Servetus. Michael Servetus (Servede),^ by birth a Spaniard, 
of the province of Aragon, was by profession a physician, 

' The treatise referred to is Dc ceterna Dei prcedestinatione. 

"^ De la vie, mceurs, actes, doctrine, et mort de Jean Calvin. Ho accused 
Calvin of the most contemptible vices, and declared that he had once been 
branded and horse-whipped for an infamous crime, etc. And to this day 
certain historians turn to this sewer of lies as a fountain of truth. 

•' Tkeciiset,, Ch'schichte de.r Antilrinilarier : I. Michael Servet und seine 
Voriiunger, Heidelberg, 1839 ; and IIerzo(;'s Rralenc. xiv. pp. 286 sqq. 


though he was also skilled in jurisprudence, and had, moreover, 
taken part in the religious movement of the age. He had 
met with Calvin as a theological opponent at Paris, and had 
been challenged by him to a disputation. Servetus, however, 
failed to make his appearance, and went to Vienne instead. 
Calvin is reported (by his adversaries) to have given the 
government of that place information against him as a teacher 
of erroneous doctrine. This Calvin denied, affirming at the 
same time, that even if he had thus acted, he would have been 
guilty of nothing wrong. Servetus was imprisoned at Vienne, 
but made his escape in April 1553. He proceeded to Geneva. 
What he sought there, M'hether or not he desired to ally himself 
with the Libertines, is a question that we shall not attempt to 
decide. For four weeks he succeeded in concealing himself, but 
at the end of that period Calvin discovered him. The council was 
immediately informed of his presence. Nicholas de Fontaines, 
a Frenchman, and Calvin's amanuensis, appeared as com- 
plainant against Servetus, who, on the 13th of August 1553, 
was committed to prison, together, as the law required, with 
his accuser. The charge against Servetus consisted of thirty- 
eight articles, setting forth dangerous errors alleged to be 
maintained by him. A slight consideration of these errors is 

According to Beza's description of Servetus, the latter was 
a monster, compounded of all possible disgusting and extra- 
vagant heresies.^ Modern investigation has furnished us with 
a less terrific picture of him. It has been said that Servetus 
denied the divinity of Christ, that he regarded Jesus of 
Nazareth as a mere man. But this, also, is incorrect. 
Servetus, if we may believe his own statements, belield in 
Christ the Son of God. Nay, more, he did not deny that the 
fulness of the Godhead dwelt in Christ. That which, how- 
ever, he did most positively disaffirm was, that the Son of 
God, Jesus Christ, had, like the Father, existed from eternity 

' " Jlonstrum ex omnibus quantumvis raiicidis ct portentosis hteresibus con- 



as a Person distinct from the Father. The Logos (the Word) 
he did not regard as identical with the personal Christ. He 
thus, undoubtedly, combated the doctrine of the Trinity as 
formulated by the Church, and in this respect adhered to the 
opinions of Sabellius and I'hotinus/ — opinions condemned by 
the ancient Church, it is true, but which, in modern times, 
have received more lenient judgment. It cannot be denied 
that the idea of a divinity filling the man (Jesus) had a 
pantheistic background, nor that the heterodoxy of Servetus 
appeared in more than a single instance ; in fact, it must be 
admitted that his whole way of thinking contained something 
that might have been perilous to the entire doctrinal system 
of the Eeformation. There was, moreover, in the personal 
character of the man something that repelled confidence, — a 
restless, defiant, and sarcastic element. Many of his utter- 
ances must necessarily have been offensive to a pious mind ; 
as, for instance, his comparison of the ecclesiastical Trinity to 
the three-headed dog Cerberus, or his pantheistic declaration, 
during his examination, that the pavement upon which he 
stood was itself God. But however frightful may be our 
conception of the man and his doctrine (though we cannot fail 
to perceive some deep religious traits in his character), the 
whole course of procedure against him will fill us with still 
greater abhorrence, if we attempt to judge it by the standard 
of modern humanity. We must, however, consider the whole 
affair in connection with the age in which it occurred, and the 
ideas then prevalent. It will readily be understood that 
Calvin exerted himself to the utmost to lead the erring man 
to another way of thinking, even visiting him in his dungeon. 
But Servetus experienced a feeling of repulsion when in the 
presence of Calvin. He said without disguise that Calvin was 
a second Simon Magus, and deserved the fate that was in pre- 
paration for himself, Calvin, on the other hand, regarded the 
doctrine of Servetus as nothing but a system of confused 
dreams. Infant baptism was among the points combated by 

1 Coinp. the author's Khxhentjcschichte, vol. i. pp. 241 sqq. , 450. 


Servetus, and we know liow severe were the measures 
employed against Anabaptists elsewhere. Can it, then, be 
any matter of surprise to us that, as early as the 23d of 
August, the Procui-ator-General proposed the infliction of 
capital punishment upon Servetus ? Before deciding the case, 
however, the opinion of other Swiss cliurches was sought. 
Bullinger, in the name of the j^eople of Zurich, characterised the 
doctrine of Servetus as thoroughly heretical and highly culp- 
able, but expressed a willingness to leave the determination of 
the punishment to be endured by the offender to the discretion 
of the Genevese Council. Switzerland, he believed, was in 
duty bound to clear herself in the eyes of other nations from 
all suspicion of heresy, and no more favourable opportunity for 
so doing could be afforded than the present. The people of 
Schaffliausen concurred in opinion with those of Zurich. The 
Bernese expressed themselves with singular sharpness. Haller 
declared that he doubted not for an instant that if Servetus 
were in Bern, short work would be made with him, and he c 
would be condemned to the fire without ceremony.^ The ,' 
people of Basel (under Antisies Simon Sulzer) were more 
lenient in their opinion. They advised that every possible 
effort should first be made to convert the erring man ; if such 
endeavours proved of no avail, they agreed that he should be 
incapacitated from doing further harm. At Geneva itself, 
Perrin hoped to rescue Servetus by bringing the process before 
the Council of Two Hundred, among whose members were 
many opponents of Calvin ; the effort to submit the case to 
that council was, however, unsuccessful. Calvin was con- 
vinced that Servetus was worthy of death, but advised that 
his execution should be by the sword, not by fire. On the of October the Council of State, united with the great 
Council of Sixty, came to a decision, and on the 26th of 
October their sentence was formally proclaimed ; it was to the 

1 A few years later (1566), the anti-Trinitarian, Valentine Gentilis, was actually jf 
beheaded at Bern ; and in 1529, Konrad had suffered the same punishment at { 



effect that Servctus should be conducted to the Place Champel 
(a slight eminence within twenty minutes' walk of Geneva), 
that he should there be bound to a stake and burned to ashes, 
together with his two books,^ as a terrific example to all who 
might be inclined to imitate his course. Servetus had not 
expected such a sentence. He was deeply moved on hearing 
it, and at first broke into loud sobs and groans. He soon, 
however, regained his composure. Farel, who was in Geneva 
at the time, was commissioned to prepare him for his end. 
The first condition submitted to him was that he should 
revoke his error. This demand occasioned fresh controversy. 
Servetus required scriptural proofs of the erroneousness of his 
doctrine, and refused to be satisfied by those furnished by 
Farel. He demanded that a passage should be shown him setting 
forth Christ, as a personality distinct from the Father, existing, 
antecedent to His birth, as the Son of God. Such a passage 
could not be found. In regard to the relation of the accused to 
Calvin, Servetus was willing to beg the Eeformer's pardon ; but 
he stedfastly refused to recant. When his sentence was read to 
him at the council-house, he entreated that it might be mitigated 
to death by the sword. But even this melancholy boon was 
denied him. He solemnly affirmed that if he had erred, it had 
been througli ignorance and with the idea that he was pro- 
moting the glory of G od. He was conducted to the place of 
execution. When again and again he ejaculated, "0 God, my 
God!" Farel asked him if he could find nothing better to say 
than that. It is expressly stated by the chroniclers of tliis sad 
event, that Servetus refrained from all blasphemy on his way to 
the stake. Before the execution, Farel exhorted the surrounding 
multitude to let the miserable man, whose sufferings they were 
about to witness, serve them as a warning of the extent to which 
Satan can mislead a man, however great his intellectual gifts may 
be. The torch was then applied to the pile. In constructing 
the latter, green wood had been employed, which refused to burn, 
and it was necessary to throw burning faggots on the unfortunate 

' Z>e Trinitatis Errorihus and De lifditutlone Christianisml. 


man.^ From the midst of the flames he was heard to cry, 
" Jems, Thou Son of the Eternal God, have mercy upon me ! " 
This failed to satisfy the scrupulous orthodoxy of his opponents, 
who demanded that he should say, " Jesus, Thou Eternal Son 
of God." Thus Servetus ended his life at the stake on the 
27th of October 1553. 

Even at that period, there was a division of sentiment in 
regard to the execution of Servetus. We have already seen 
that the orthodox leaders of other Swiss churches entertained 
the same views as Calvin and the Genevese. Those who 
themselves had experienced the severity of Calvin thought 
differently. Bolsec's party revived, and launched forth into 
invectives against Calvin. Many declared that a new pope 
and a new inquisition had arisen. Calvin was compelled to 
publish a vindication of his conduct.^ In the month of March 
there appeared, in the interests of the opposite party, a pub- 
lication ostensibly printed at Magdeburg (but in reality from 
the press of Basel), professing to come from the pen of Martin 
Bellius. This individual was, doubtless, none other than 
Sebastian Castellio, who had, for the purpose of composing 
the libel, associated himself with others, possibly with Martin 
Borrhaus, Lselius Socinus, and Secundus Curio. The book 
was dedicated to Duke Christopher of Wurtemberg. Without 
mention being made of the process of Servetus, the tractate, in 
general terms and with citations from weighty authorities, 
denied to magistrates the right of inflicting capital punishment 
upon heretics. The publication called forth a reply from 
Theodore Beza in defence of Calvin and the principles 
adhered to by that Eeformer.^ " If it be both the right and 
the duty of the State " — this was the logic of the orthodoxy 

^ This is according to the one-sided reports of Calvin's opponents. 

- Fidelis expositio errorum Michcelis Sen-eti et brevis eorundem refutat'io, iihl 
docetur, jure gladii hceretkos esse coercendos, 1554. This writing was signed by- 
fifteen ministers of the city of Geneva. 

3 To the tractate, Be non j^uniendis gladio hcereticia (of this publication an 
abstract is given by Milhly, pp. 38 sqq.), Beza replied by a treatise, entitled, 
De hcereticis a civili magistratu imniendis. The latter was translated into 
French in 15G0. 


of the age — " to iuflict death as a punishment for murder, 
adultery, theft, etc., crimes \Adiich affect only temporal posses- 
sions, how much more is it incumbent upon the civil authority 
to take up arms against heresy, which kindles a fire that can 
be quenched only with the everlasting burning of many 
thousands ! " And such principles were assented to even by 
Melanchthon, a man who was in other respects so pacific and 
yielding.-' We doubt whether Luther would have given them 
his approval, especially when we call to mind that saying of 
his, that " heresy is a spiritual thing, that cannot be hewn 
with any axe, or burned with any fire, or drowned with any 

Be the matter twisted and turned as it may, the burning of 
Servetus will ever remain a dark spot on the history of the 
Reformation, and in the life of Calvin. We must not, how- 
ever, charge on Calvin the whole odium of an act in which 
he was supported by the age in which he lived, or at least by 
a large proportion of its representative men. How many 
Anabaptists were beheaded and drowned in the age of the 
Reformation, whom no one ever thinks of mentioning ! Why 
is it that the execution of Servetus alone is always harped 
upon as a misdeed of Calvin's ? Possibly, because the 
horrible manner of his death serves, more than any other, 
to recall the horrors of the Inquisition, and the executions 
of Huss and Savonarola. And moreover, Calvin's personal 
participation in the details of the process appears in a manner 
so conspicuous as to enable us to understand how the anti- 
pathy of later generations to such bloody judgments upon 
heretics became connected, more closely than is consistent 
with justice, with a previously-existent antipathy to the harsh 
and awe-inspiring character of the Genevese Reformer, 

In view of the unjust censure thus heaped upon Calvin, it 

1 Melanclitlion wrote to Calvin, under date 14tli October 1554, as follows : — " 1 
thoroughly approve the action of your magistrates in putting such a blasphemer 
to death, in accordance with the sentence pronounced upon liim, and also iu 
accordance with justice " {Corp. Ref. viii. p. 362 ; comp. p. 250). 

Calvin's conflicts. 341 

is more than ever our duty, as lovers of impaitial history, to 
turn now from the bloody scene of Servetus' execution and 
gather the most important remaining particulars of the rich 
and, in many respects, blessed labours of the great Eeformer. 
We must first seek him once more upon the field of battle. 
The Libertines continued to give him much trouble. Perrin, 
once banished, had (as will have been inferred from an account 
of the trial of Servetus) returned to the city, where (since 
15 53) he had again been discharging the office of syndic. 
Berthelier, son of the Berthelier who had been executed in 
former political disturbances at Geneva, became one of the 
chiefs of the Libertines. Being excommunicated by the 
Consistory, he complained to the Government. The latter 
commanded the Consistory to abrogate its sentence of excom- 
munication, a requirement which the Consistory refused to 
comply with. The Government then itself laid hold upon 
tlie spiritual authority, discharged Berthelier from the ban, 
and furnished him with a letter of absolution, to which the 
seal of the city was affixed. Calvin protested against this 
procedure, and continued to debar Berthelier from the Lord's 
Supper. From the pulpit he declared : " I will suffer death 
sooner than with my own hand give the holy of the Lord to 
such convicted despisers of God." These w^ords produced so 
great an impression that a disturbance was apprehended. 
The syndic privately intimated to Berthelier that, in order to 
prevent any disturbance, it would be well for him to absent 
himself from the table of the Lord. In the afternoon Calvin 
again ascended the pulpit, and warned the congregation that 
he might soon be taken away from them. He declared that 
he had no desire to fight against the Government, but exhorted 
them to stand firm in the faith, and, in the words of the 
apostle, commended them to God and to the work of His 
grace. The discourse produced a powerful impression. The 
council became aware of the impropriety of its action and 
revoked the decree of absolution. The opinions of the other 
Swiss churches, sought for in this case also, were all in favour 


of Calvin. Perrin still refused to relinquish all hope of 
success in tlie cause which he had espoused, but he and 
Berthelier were finally obliged to leave the city. 

This was the last external struggle in whicli the Reformer 
was engaged previous to the close of the year (1555) which 
we regard as terminating the epoch of the lieformation. 

We shall continue our narrative of Calvin's life to its end, 
however. An event which had an important bearing upon 
the ecclesiastical and scientific interests of Geneva M-as tlie 
founding of the academy in 1558. This institution was 
primarily designed for the education of theologians. Calvin 
would gladly have expanded it into a University, but for this 
the pecuniary resources of the little state of Geneva were 
inadequate. On the 5th of June 1559, the academy was 
opened with great solemnity. Theodore Beza was its first 
rector.-^ In the very first year after its foundation, nine 
hundred men, from almost all the nations of Europe, entered 
their names upon the rolls of the institution. The influence 
which Calvin exerted over foreign countries will appear in 
my history of the Church in other lands. His correspondence 
was immense and extended in all directions. His industry 
was marvellous. To be condemned to idleness, as he occa- 
sionally was when sickness interfered with his labours, was 
most painful to him. His incessant mental exertions, com- 
bined with the constant nervous excitement which he was 
compelled to undergo, at length consumed his physical 
strength. He frequently suffered from fever, gout, cough, and 
asthma — troubles which at the last increased so distressingly 
that he went to the pulpit from his bed, and returned to the 
latter immediately after the close of service. He was at last 
obliged to permit liimself to be either carried or supported to 
his lecture - room. He began the exposition of Ezekiel in 
1563, but was unable to complete it. Exhausted with labour 
and borne down by sickness, he longed for repose, On tlie 
6th of February 1564, he preached his last sermon, being 

^ For particulars, sec Stahelix, i. pji. 485 sqq. 


much liiiidered by cougliing and blood-spitting. He was often 
heard to exclaim amid his pain, " How long, Lord ? " He 
daily occupied himself witli the Holy Scriptures. On the 
1.0 th of March the council directed that public prayer should 
be made for his continuance in life. As CEcolampadius had 
done, Calvin, on the 24th of March, assembled the ministers 
of the Church about him. On the 27th he had himself 
carried to the council - house, tottered up the steps of the 
building, entered the hall, removed his cap, and thanked the 
assembled council for the benefits which they had conferred 
upon him and the good-will manifested toward him. On a 
subsequent occasion, in April, when a deputation from the 
council visited him on his sick-bed,^ he recommended to the 
" might}^ seigniors " {magnifiqncs seignieurs), as he called them, 
the exercise of firmness and perseverance, with hope in Him 
who calleth the dead back to life. He concluded his advice 
with the following words of warning : — " If you desire that 
this commonwealth should continue, take care that the seat 
of authority in which God has placed you be not defiled : for 
He is the eternal and most high God, the King of kings, the 
Lord of lords, who will put honour upon them that honour 
Him, and will overthrow them that despise Him." 

On the 2d of April (Easter-day), he caused himself to be 
carried to church on a litter, listened to the sermon, and re- 
ceived the sacrament from the hand of Beza. With a trembling 
voice he joined in the singing of the last psalm. On the 24th 
he drew up his will. His whole disposable property, which 
fell to his nephews and nieces, consisted of 225 thalers. He 
had never striven after wealth — had refused many presents. 
He, however, accepted with gratitude among other gifts some 
old wine, which the council sent him for his strengthening, 
because " he had none that was good." Even his enemies 
bore witness to his disinterested and unselfish spirit. Pope 
Pius IV. said that the strength of this heretic consisted in the 

^ For further particulars concerning Calvin's last hours, see Stahelin, ii. px\ 
450 sqq. ; and Henuy, iii. chap. ii. pp. 574 sqq. 



fact that money had no power over him. AVhen Cardinal 
Sadolet wished to visit him in Geneva, he expected to find 
liim in such a palace as a Eomish Lishop would have occupied, 
and was exceedingly surprised at the modest parsonage to 
which he was directed. 

On the 28 th of April, Calvin again summoned the clergy 
to his side. He sent Farel a letter of farewell on the 2d of 
May. Although Calvin charged his old friend not to come to 
him, Farel at once hastened to Geneva to take leave of the 
Eeformer in person. Calvin spent the rest of his days in 
prayer, yet the door of his sick-room was always open to any 
■who desired to enter. On the 19 th of May (before Whitsun- 
tide) the clergy assembled at his house to partake of a love- 
feast. From this the sick man was obliged to permit himself 
to be carried away and laid upon his bed, which he never left 
again. Only a wall divided him from liis colleagues, who sat 
for some time expectant of his end. He died at about eight 
o'clock in the evening of the 27th of May. "At the moment 
when the sun went down," says Beza, " the greatest light that 
ever shone for the benefit of God's Church on earth returned 
to heaven." Calvin retained his consciousness to his last 
breath. There was great and general mourning over his 
departure ; BuUinger's grief was most profound. On the day 
following that on which Calvin died, his body, enclosed in a 
simple coffin, was borne to the city cemetery of Plain-Palais. 
The coffin was followed by the patricians and clergy of Geneva, 
and great numbers of the people. Without the slightest 
ostentation, and in the customary manner (d la facon ac- 
coutumdc), in accordance with his expressed desires, the body 
of Calvin was committed to the earth. His grave, which was 
marked by no monument, could in later years be discovered 
only witli difficulty, and not with perfect certainty. Some 
twenty years ago a black grave-stone was placed on the spot 
conjectured to be that of the Peformer's interment. Of the 
less than fifty-five years which he had lived, the full half had 
been devoted almost exclusively to the ministry of the gospel. 







WE cannot take leave of Calvin without glancing once 
more at his character, and comparing him with the 
two great German-speaking Eeformers, Luther and Zwingle. 
His external appearance has been described by his friend 
Beza.^ In stature he was not large, his complexion was pale 
and quite dark, his eyes were bright and sparkling, and his 
glance was acute. Who has not seen his picture, and in- 
voluntarily contrasted it with the very different faces of 
Luther and Zwingle ? There is certainly no other of our 
Eeformers concerning whom opinions are more at variance 
than they are over Calvin. In advancing this statement, 
we are not thinking of his opponents belonging either to 
the Eoman Catholic or to the Lutheran Church. Our own 
Eeformed Church is manifestly divided into two groups, 
composed respectively of those who regard either Zwingle or 
Calvin as the type and model of the true Eeformed theologian. 
The sympathies with and antipathies against the Eeformer of 
Geneva are due not simply to his nationality, — ^which, as a 
matter of course, impressed upon the visage of the Frenchman 
.a stamp totally different from that borne by the physiognomies 
of the two Germans, — but rather to the peculiar personal 
^ Comp. Henry, iii. chap. ii. p. 593. 


characteristics of the man. Consider, moreover, in this re- 
lation, the difference in the natural dispositions of Calvin and 
Luther ; the latter was hot-Llooded and impetuous, the former 
a man of iron nerve and will. Each was possessed of a 
choleric temperament — tinged in tlie one case, however, with 
a melancholy, and in the other with a sanguine admixture ; 
though Luther, in the later years of his life, became more 
phlegmatic. "VVe have already drawn attention to the fact 
that an aristocratic element was co-operative in the education 
of Calvin, and accompanied him through life ; while Luther 
and Zwingle were both men of the people, and true Germans, 
though of different tribes. Calvin's latest biography ^ correctly 
remarks, — but lays, perhaps, undue stress on the statement, 
— that the preaching of the Genevese Reformer woke an 
answerinff chord in tlie breast of the hiirher and educated 
circles of society more frequently than in the heart of the 
people, especially the country people. This may be accounted 
for partly by the fact that he was not encircled by a family 
life, such as surrounded Luther and Zwingle. Calvin did 
not belong to the home sphere, nor did he pertain, strictly 
speaking, to any particular national church, but to the whole 
Evangelical Church, as whose metropolis he regarded Geneva, 
with its theocratic regulations. His conflict with the Liber- 
tines is specially connected with the fact that he held the 
politico-civil interests of old Geneva and the Genevese 
burghers to be far inferior in importance to their religious 
interests, and, when it seemed requisite, sacrificed the former 
to the latter. Calvin had, so to speak, no earthly fatherland, 
whose liberty he felt impelled, like Zwingle, to defend, lie 
considered it his vocation to gather all wliom he could into 
the heavenly fatherland, the city of God. To him there was 
neither Greek nor Scythian, neither Frenchman, German, nor 
Switzer, but only the new creature in Christ Jesus. It would 
be folly to reproach him for entertaining such sentiments. 
Nay, it has justly been remarked, that Calvin, although he 

' IvAMrscnULTE, p. 448. 


soiiglit not the greatness of Geneva as sucli, nevertheless 
assisted that city to attain to a world-historic glory, which 
without him would never have been hers.^ It is true, how- 
ever, that those purely human graces which have their root 
in the family and in the popular life, and which it is the 
mission of Christianity to ennoble, and not to destroy, were 
ratlier feebly developed in Calvin. Men of a severe turn of 
thought and rigidly legal ideas will be inclined to elevate 
Calvin above Luther and Zwingle, And in some points of 
character he was incontestably their superior. On the other 
hand, minds of a poetic and emotional cast will at first be 
chilled by Calvin's abstract piety, detached, as it seems to 
them, from the soil of nature, nor will they be able to over- 
come this feeling for some little time ; while they are sensible 
of an immediate attraction to the heart-winning Luther, an 
attraction which ceases not even when he rages and fumes. 

If we consider the two men in their relation to friend and 
foe, we find that Calvin is in general far removed from the 
plebeian roughness of Luther. In his intercourse with others 
he exhibits more urbanity and complaisance, qualities which 
the Frenchman usually possesses in a higher degree than the 
German ; but Calvin could also be acrimonious when the 
occasion required. " A dog," thus he writes to the Queen of 
Navarre,^ " barks when he sees iiis master attacked ; it w^ould 
be cowardice for me to see the truth of God attacked and 
keep silence." In his zeal for the word of the Lord, he, like 
Luther, knows no bounds in the choice of the terms whicli 
he employs against those whom he regards as its adversaries ;'^ 
and although he does not, like Luther, always brandish the 
rude war-club of natural growth, he wields with even greater 
effect a ^veil-practised sword, whose blade penetrates to the 

' Krauss, "Calvin vor der exacten Ge.sclnchte " (in tlie Klrchenhlatt filr die 
reformirte K'lrche der Schweiz, 1864, Nos. 22 and 23). 

* EpUres franraises, i. p. 114. 

^ Porci, can't, nebulones, are the honourable titles which he is ever bestowing 
upon his opponents, doubtless with a reference to Matt. vii. 6. He, however, 
frequently makes an unwarrantable application of these scriptural epitliets. 


348 HISTORY OF the reformation. 

very bone and marrow of his opponent. Calvin's true 
nobility and magnanimity are evidenced in one of his letters 
to Bullino-er, in which he declared that he should not 
cease to regard Luther as a chosen minister of God, even 
though Luther were to call him a devih He looked upon 
the German Reformer as a man " who exhibited both great 
virtues and great faults." And just such a man was Calvin 

We should do the Genevan Eeformer injustice were we, on 
account of his ofttimes startling severity, to deny that he 
possessed any sensibility, or, still more, to affirm that he was 
destitute of love. It is a fact that the eternal truth of God, 
whereof he regarded himself as a herald, was considered by Calvin 
to have higlier claims upon him than even natural affection for 
those to whom he was bound by the ties of kindred. " When 
I observe," he writes to another high patroness, the Duchess 
Een(3e of Perrara, — " when I observe any one malevolently 
striving to overthrow the word of God, and to quench the 
light of truth, I cannot forgive him such conduct, nor could 
I pardon him were he my own father a hundred times over. " ^ 
But did not Luther make use of similar expressions ? Did 
not Christ Himself thus speak ? And who would venture to 
accuse the Saviour of a lack of love ? Fidelity to God and 
His word did not with Calvin exclude fidelity to man ; love 
to Christ did not shut out love to the brethren. On the 
contrary, if Calvin could hate heartily, he could also love 
with all his heart. He was constant in his friendships, and 
was capable of the greatest sacrifices when occasion demanded 
that he should prove his faith by works of love. During 
the prevalence of the plague he voluntarily offered himself 
for service at the hospital. The civil authorities would not, 
however, accept his offer, not being willing tliat he should 
abandon the regular course of his labours, upon which the 
blessing of God manifestly [rested. Calvin's acquiescence in 
the will of his superiors, his refraining, like the general on 

' EpUres franraises, i. p. 47. 


the battle-field, from heedless exposure of himself to the 
enemy's artillery, can assuredly not be censured, more espe- 
cially as he at no time disdained diligently to visit and 
care for the sick in the city whenever it was possible. The 
inexhaustibleness of Calvin's loving impulse to help and 
advise on every side, and to comply with all requisitions 
upon him, from the weightiest demands upon his Christian 
charity down to the little courtesies of friendship, is most 
brilliantly evidenced by his extensive correspondence. How 
many tears were dried by this apparently austere man ! From 
how many embarrassments did he extricate others! How 
many questions of conscience did he settle with his trusty 
counsel ! In this respect he is in no wise inferior to Luther, 
and it may well be that he not unfrequently surpassed him 
in tact and tenderness. 

We might pursue our comparison of the two Reformers 
still farther. We might show how much less sympathy with 
nature is exhibited by Calvin than by Luther, and how, on 
the other hand, the Genevan Eeformer was less sensible of the 
influence of those occult forces which Luther battled against 
as demoniac powers.-^ In all things Calvin w^as more sober 
and moderate than Luther, and of all the Eeformers he pos- 
sessed the least poetic sentiment. On one solitary occasion 
he made trial of his powers of versification in a Latin poem, 
while Luther and Zwingie were in the habit of composing 
poetry in their vernacular tongue. Calvin was not lacking in 
wit, and that of an acute and trenchant, as well as subtile 
nature ; ' but he had no such sense of the ludicrous, no such 
aptness at pleasantries of an artless and popular, and hence 

' It has been observed by Henry, vol. i. p. 488, that Calvin gives himself 
much less concern about the devil than does Lnther. (We have remarked the 
same in the case of Zwingie.) Not that the doctrinal idea of the devil was 
absent from Calvin's system or belief. He everywhere speaks of " Satan " (thus 
he most frequently styles him) when he is treating of hostility to the kingdom 
of God, or attacks upon the gospel. But of personal assaults, such as those 
from which Luther suffered, of diabolical phantasms, he is no less iguorant than 

^ His treatise against relics sometimes reminds one of Bayle and Voltaire. 



also uiipolislieJ character — a species of humour native to the 
German mind and habit of thought, as we encounter in 
Luther's 2\ihlc Talk, for instance. This very rigour, which, by 
a strict observance of discipline in every relation of life, 
withdraws all nourishment from the wantonness of the flesh, 
is by many regarded as an advantage that Calvinism possesses 
over Lutheranism. Luther himself could not withhold his 
praise from the strict exercise of ecclesiastical discipline 
which prevailed in all the Swiss churches. And assuredly, 
we ourselves are far from depreciating the lofty earnestness 
which pervades the whole Calvinistic system of lieform, and 
which gave it more and more of that steady consistency that 
was requisite in its conflict witli opposing powers, and without 
which no victory is ever obtained. Hence we repeat the 
remark previously made, that neither Reformer can be said 
to be absolutely superior to the other, but that each supple- 
mented the other in accordance with his peculiar God-given 
powers. In conclusion of our critique of Calvin, we cite, as 
expressive of our own views, the following observation of a 
contemporary author : — " Calvin erred, like every other pioneer 
mind, and sinned, like every child of Adam ; but never since 
his time has any man laboured wath equal earnestness and 
self-regardless energy in the effort, which is engaging the 
better minds of our own age, to bring all religious truth 
into ethical operation, and to make religion the ruling principle 
of ethics."^ 

Finally, in regard to tlie extent of the Calvinistic ricforma- 
tion, we would observe that its principles are far more widely 
diffused than those of the Lutheran or the Zwinglian systems 
of Eeform. In a certain sense, Calvin, in comparing himself 
with the other Eeformers, might have repeated the words of 
the Apostle Paul : " I laboured more abundantly than they 
all" (1 Cor. XV. 10). Outside of Germany and Switzerland, 
with few exceptions, the Eeformation assumed the Calvinistic 

1 Kratss, I.e. ; conip. also IlAL'S8Ei;,(?e6'c/»"c/(<e des Zeitalttrs der Rc/ormatlon , 
l-p. 2S6 S(i,i. 


type. Though the ideas of Luther first found acceptance 
in the countries to -which we refer, it was througli the in- 
fluence of Calvinistic principles that the Protestantism of 
those lands assumed an external form and organization, and 
attained to definite dimensions in the history of the world. 
The Zwinglian Eeformation, against which the German 
Lutheran Church closed its doors, was confined to a narrow 
territory ; it cannot be said that it prevailed even throughout 
Germanic Switzerland. In Basel, for instance, CEcolampadius 
pursued, in many respects, his own course, which differed from 
that of Zwingle in Zurich, Lutheran influences, likewise, 
began to be active in Switzerland.^ Through the history of 
Calvin's first labours at Geneva, we are already acquainted 
with the conflicts which arose between the German (Bernese) 
and the Eomanic system of Reform in Geneva itself. The 
Zwinglian and Calvinistic Eeformations at first stood in 
the relation of aliens to each other, — a relation fostered, doubt- 
less, by the difference in their respective tongues, — and 
no small exertion was requisite to effect an approximation 
between the heterogeneous elements, and to induce them to 

Such was the task of Bullinger, In the year 1536, 
Bullinger made the acquaintance of Calvin at Basel ; he after- 
wards exerted himself to procure his return from Strassburg 
to Geneva, and maintained an epistolary correspondence with 
him. He speedily came to an agreement with Calvin on the 
subject of the Lord's Supper, and also submitted his Latin 
treatise. On the Sacraments, to Calvin, who approved the 
view^s therein set forth. It was proposed that the Swiss 
churches should endeavour to arrive at an agreement con- 
cerning the doctrine of the sacraments. In March 1549, a 
synod was held for this purpose at Bern, at which Calvin was 
present. The Genevan Eeformer then resolved to visit Zurich 
in person, which he accordingly did, stopping at Xeuchatel to 

' See HuNDESHAGEN, Ueher die Conflicte des Zwinglianismus, Lutherthiims, 
iitd Calvinismus in der Berner Landeskirche, Bern, 1841. 


induce Farel to accompany him. T]ie two friends were 
kindly received by Bullinger and Lis colleagues, and the 
ensuing conference proceeded happily. In the first two hours 
of the session, a number of articles were agreed upon, which 
were afterward set forth in the so-called Consensus of Zurich 
{Consensus Tigurinus)} This consensus was agreed to by the 
other Swiss churches, although Bern at first objected to it. 
Followers of the Eeformed doctrine in foreign lands likewise 
signified their assent to the consensus. Indeed, it may be 
said that the Eeformed Churches scattered throughout the 
different countries of Europe now first became aware of their 
intrinsic connection. 

The harmony thus exhibited proved highly vexatious to the 
rigid Lutheran party in Germany. Joachim Westphal, a 
preacher in Hamburg, in the year 1552 attacked the con- 
sensus and assailed the Swiss doctrine of the Lord's Supper 
anew, in the tone which Luther had been wont to employ, 
but without the intellect displayed l)y the latter. Westphal 
enumerated no less than twenty-eight statements in which he 
declared that the Sacramentarians had contradicted themselves.^ 
Calvin felt constrained to issue a defence of the Eeformed 
doctrines against this assailant.^ This vindication was not 
expressed in the most gentle terms imaginable, for he called 
Westphal a " beast," and Bullinger was obliged to recommend 

Three years before Calvin's death, Melanclithon was gathered 
to the fathers. Before we take leave of tlie German and 
Swiss Eeformations and glance at the course of Eeform in 
other countries, let us take one more view of this great 
theologian. Without following his footsteps further in the 

' The full title is as follows : — Gegenseitiges Einverstandniss in Betreff der 
Sacramente zwischen den Dienern der Kirche zu Zurich und Johann Calvin, 
Diener der Kirche zu Genf. For particulars, see Pestalozzi, pp. 378 sqi|. 

^ Westphal's work bears the following title : — Farrago confufianeariim rt 
inter se dinsidentium opinionum de coma Domini ex Sacramentariorum lihris 
difjesta. It was followed in 1.053 and 1555 by other polemical writings bearing 
various titles. 

^ Defennio sanm ct orthodoxy doctrincp, etc. (see r^sTALOZZi and Stahei.ix, I.e.). 


controversies in which he was involved, we shall speak only 
of the evening of his life and of his departure from this world, 
in order that a picture of Melanchthon's death-bed may not 
be lacking from the mental gallery in which we have already 
placed scenes from the last days of Luther, (Ecolampadius, 
and Calvin. 

Amid Melanchthon's many labours and conflicts, his strength 
had been visibly declining since the year 1558. An affection 
of the chest by which he was attacked, inspired his son-in-law, 
Doctor Peucer, with grave apprehensions. His hands began 
to tremble, his eyes grew weaker, and writing became more 
burdensome to him day by day. Notwithstanding this, he 
was indefatigable in letter-writing and in elaborating his 
learned works. In 1560 he entered upon his sixty-third 
year, a period which he had frequently termed a critical one. 
" If it be God's will," he said to his friends, " I should be 
glad to die ; I desire to depart, in order to be with my dear 
Lord Christ." Again, he remarked to Camerarius ^ as they 
sat side by side on one occasion : " My dear Joachim, we 
have been good friends for nearly forty years, and have loved 
one another, not from interested motives, but freely, from our 
hearts ; and we have both been schoolmasters and faithful 
comrades, each in his place, and I hope to God that our labour 
has not been in vain, but that it may have accomplished great 
good : if it be God's will that I should die, we will renew our 
friendship in the life to come." Camerarius then parted from 
him and saw him no more. The sick man had his travellins- 
bed put up in his study, saying that it would truly be a 
travelling-bed, for in it he should journey to his home. He 
was soon surrounded by his family, his friends, and his students. 
He bade them all an affectionate farewell and gave them 
friendly counsel. The thing that grieved him most and made 
it hard for him to die was " the wretched state of the holy 
Christian Church, resulting," as he said, " from the unneces- 
sary division, malice, and wilfulness of those who, influenced 
' [Joachim Camerarius, the biograiiher of Melanchthoii.J 



by their own inhuman envy and hatred, have separated from 
us without any just cause." During the night of the 18th and 
19th of March, Melanchthon was more restless than usual. 
The hour of his death was approaching. The lectures at the 
University were intermitted on the following day, and the 
whole body of the students were invited to join in prayer, 
Melanchthon, on being asked by Peucer if there was anything 
he desired, replied, " Nothing but heaven, therefore ask me 
no more." This pastor prayed beside him and gave him his 
benediction, while other friends who were present knelt. 
Professor Winsheim repeated the words of the Psalm : " Into 
Thy hands I commend my spirit ; Thou hast redeemed me, 
Thou faithful and true God." The lips of the dying man 
meantime moved in prayer. At seven o'clock he gently fell 
asleep, without a death struggle. And thus was granted the 
petition that he had so often urgently preferred before God, 
that He would deliver him from the " rage " {rabies) of the 
theologians who were pressing upon him. 

On the day after his death, his old friend Lucas Cranach, 
who had portrayed Luther as he lay in his last slumber, took 
the likeness of Melanchthon once more. Students and 
burghers hastened to view the beloved remains. Fathers 
brought their little children, that in later years they might 
remember having looked upon this man of God. 

George Major, vice-rector of the University, issued a " letter 
of lamentation and consolation," inviting attendance at the 
funeral of Melanchthon. A long funeral cortege proceeded 
first to the parish church, where a discourse was delivered by 
Paul Eber, and thence to the Castle church, where Vitus 
Winsheim delivered another oration. The coffin was lowered 
to a final resting-place, opposite the grave of Luther. The 
tidings of Melanchthon's death everywhere occasioned pro- 
found mourning. It was felt that in the departure of Germany's 
great teacher, a brilliant star had set. 

It now remains for us to glance at the condition of the 
other countries of Europe at the time of which we treat, and 


for the present this glance must necessarily be a hasty one. 
In a subsequent series of lectures (vol. iv. of our Church 
History), we propose to set forth in detail the history of 
Reform in the countries to which we have reference, in con- 
nection v/itli their further religious development subsequent 
to the age of the Eeformation. We have time now only for 
such particulars as are necessary to complete this sketch of 
the History of the Eeformation which we have framed in the 
narrow limits of a half century. 

France ^ had been ruled since 1547 by Henry ii., son of 
Francis i. With Henry, as we have already seen, Maurice of 
Saxony had formed an alliance against the Emperor Charles Y. 
Henry was altogether led by his favourites, the Constable de 
Montmorency and Diana of Poitiers, Duchess of Valentinois, 
the mistress of the king, and, besides these two. Cardinal 
Charles de Lorraine and Marshal de St. Andre. All of these 
were decided opponents of Protestantism. When, in 1549 
Henry made his solemn entry into Paris, there were blazing, 
as if in celebration of the festal occasion, the flames of funeral 
piles on which heretics were being sacrificed. In June 1551 
was issued the edict of Chateaubriant, in accordance with 
which Parliament and the Episcopal courts were united in one 
court of inquisition, over which the Dominican, Matthias Orri, 
presided. The estates of refugees were confiscated, and all 
books and pamphlets published in Germany or Geneva were 
seized. In 1552 an interdict was laid upon the so-called 
private schools (dcoles huissonnidres), in which the Protestants 
were endeavouring to instruct the youth in their doctrine. 
Numerous executions took place in the years 1553 and 1554 
also. I will but mention in passing those five students of 
Lausanne, young men from different parts of France, who, 
after a tedious imprisonment, were consigned to the flames on 

^ Crottet, Petite chronique de France, 16""' siicJe, Paris, 1846 ; Felice, 
Histoire des Protestants de France, Paris, 1850 ; Driox, Hlstoire chrono- 
lofjique de Veglise protestante de France, Paris, 1855 ; PuAUX, Histoire de la 
reformation fran^ciise, Paris, 1857. 


tlie 6tli of May 1553.^ Amid all these distresses, the 
Protestants of France clung faithfully together. De la 
Ferri^re, a nobleman, and Le Macon, a clergyman, were the 
central personages of the Parisian congregation, which was 
obliged to keep itself as secret as possible. Similar religious 
fellowships were to be found at the same time at IMeaux, 
Angers, Poitiers, Bourges, Blois, Tours, Orleans, Ptouen, Sens, 
Dijon, and La Eochelle. Indeed, in September 1555, at the 
very time when the Peace of Augsburg, sanctioning the 
Reformation, was concluded in Germany, the foundation was 
laid in France for an organization of the Evangelical congre- 
gations subsisting in that kingdom. 

In the Netherlands, where heretic blood first was shed, 
Protestantism continued to be persecuted. In 1531 the 
Stadtholderess Margaret, aunt of Charles v., died. She was 
succeeded by her sister Mary, queen-dowager of Hungary. 
Although this lady was well affected toward the l*rotestants, 
her position prohibited her from espousing their cause. On 
the contrary, she was prevailed upon by the Papal legate to 
employ violent measures against them. In the year 1543 
several Protestants were condemned to the flames, and in 
1546 the theologians of Louvaine prepared an index of pro- 
hibited books, among which were included the Holy Scriptures, 
i.e. any translations of them in the vernacular. On the 2d 
of April 1550, the laws relating to prohibited books were 
renewed, and the most cruel penalties threatened against all 
who were disobedient. The inquisitors were authorized to 
arrest suspected persons of either sex and of every rank. 
Incarceration, capital j^unishment, and confiscation of pro- 
perty were the means employed to intiniidate the Evan- 

In Hungary the gospel had been preached by Luther's 
table companion, Matthias Devay, who has been called the 

' See PiPRii's Eraniji'Ufichen Kalendcr, 1800, pp. 170 sqq. We ]) 
recurring to the story of these martyrdoms in the next volume of the Church 


Hungarian Luther/ He suffered bonds for Christ's sake at 
Ofen, and at Vienna answered for himself before Bishop Faber. 
After visiting his beloved Wittenberg once more, he returned 
to his native land, bearing recommendations from Melanchthon^ 
and was supported in his proclamation of the Eeformed doc- 
trines by Thomas Nadasdy, who in 1554 had become Palatine 
of Hungary. 

In Transylvania, another Wittenberg scholar, John Honter 
by name, pastor of Kronstadt (since 1544), defended the 
Evangelical faith against its opponents. At the synod of 
Madiasch (1545) the Confession of Augsburg was adopted. 
An Evangelical school was founded at Kronstadt. 

In Poland the dissenters, comprising Lutherans, Calvinists, 
and Bohemian Brethren, were tolerated under the government 
of the last of the Jagellons, King Sigismund li. (Sigismund 
Augustus). Many magnates and nobles, and also burghers, em- 
braced tlie Evangelical faith, without encountering the slightest 
opposition.^ One of the most distinguished of the Eeformed 
theologians of Poland was Francis Lismann, a native of the 
isle of Corfu. In 1553 Lismann travelled through Italy and 
Switzerland, and formed the acquaintance of Calvin at Geneva. 
Though he had stood high in favour with the king, his formal 
adoption of the Eeformed faith drew upon him the royal 
displeasure. Being obliged to leave Poland, he repaired to 
Konigsberg, where he was appointed counsellor to Duke 
Albert of Prussia. We have also to mention, in this connec- 
tion, Francis Stancarus of Mantua, who was a teacher of 
Hebrew at Cracow, and, above all, John a Lasco (Lasky), a 

I See Luther's letters, De Wette, v. No. 2111 (of the year 1542), and No. 
2206, to the clergy in Eperies, 21st April 1544. 

* The city of Thorn, which was for some time held in bondage to Kome by 
Bishop Hosius, obtained permission under this king, by a patent dated 25th 
March 1557, freely and publicly to exercise the Protestaut religion. See BiiOHX, 
" Kirchliche zustande in Thorn, 1520-1551," in the Zeitschr. fur histor. Theol. 
1869, p. 4. 

3 This person must not be confounded -with the elder John a Lasco, archbishop 
of Gnesen and primate of Poland (he died in 1531), who was a friend of Erasmus, 
by whom his learning and piety were highly extolled. Our Lasky was boru at 


native of Poland. These two, however, caused their light to 
shine not only in Poland, but also elsewhere. 

In Italy the battle of minds w^as still going forward. It 
will suffice to mention a few particulars of the conflict. Since 
the year 1524 there had been formed, in Milan and other 
cities of Lombardy and the Venetian territory, small and great 
Evangelical communities, in which the Scriptures of the New 
Testament and the writings of the Eeformers were read. At 
Bologna, where many Germans were pursuing their studies, 
the ideas of the Eeformers found more and more acceptance. 
In this city the Franciscan monk, Giovanni JMollio, a native 
of Montalcino (near Siena), was discharging the functions of 
preacher and professor. He had been convinced of the uu- 
tenableness of the Eomish faith by Bullinger's treatise on the 
mass and the invocation of saints. After this change in his 
religious views, he delivered lectures on the Pauline Epistles. 
In consequence of the doctrines thus set forth by him, an 
endeavour was made to remove him from Bologna, and in 
1538, at the instigation of the Cardinal-legate Campeggio, he 
was appointed lector in the monastery of San Lorenzo at 
Naples. This very act advanced the cause which it was 
intended to injure. Juan Valdez, a Spaniard, who since 1536 
had been secretary to the Viceroy of Naples, was then gather- 
ing around him a circle of men and women who held their 
religious meetings in various places, but principally in the 
palaces and villas of the great (sometimes at the residence of 
the Viceroy himself). This company, which called itself " The 
Blessed Fellowship," was joined by Mollio and his two famous 
Tuscan compatriots, Bernardino Occhino and Peter Martyr. 
Occhino, the Capuchin general, was among the most celebrated 
pulpit orators of Italy. Charles v., on hearing one of his 

Warsaw in 1499; he studied at Zurich and Basel, and was on friendly terms 
with many of the Swiss Reformers. We shall meet with him again in the 
church history of England. He died in 1560. M. Giibel (in llerzog's Reaknc. 
viii. p. 304) remarks concerning him : " He was in learning an Erasmian, in 
faith a Lutheran (?), in his mode of worship a Zwinglian, and in his ideas of 
church polity a Calvinist " (!). 


sermons at Naples in 1536, exclaimed, "Truly this monk 
could draw tears from stones ! " Soon the fruits of the 
preaching of the gospel became manifest. One who lived at 
tlie time^ thus describes the awakening that ensued : " Truly 
a wonderful phenomenon is occurring in these our days. 
Women, whose minds are usually inclined to vanity rather 
than to learning, manifest that they have penetrated deep 
into the truths of salvation ; and men in the humblest cir- 
cumstances, even soldiers, show us a picture of the perfect 
Christian life ! Century worthy of the Golden Age ! Merciful 
God, what a rich outpouring of the Holy Spirit !" But a 
change was soon to take place. The Inquisition, introduced 
into Italy in 1542, dispersed the "Blessed Fellowship." 
MoUio left Naples in 1548. After experiencing a variety of 
fortunes, he was arrested at Eavenna in 1553, at the com- 
mand of Julius III., and conducted to Eome. There he was 
examined before the tribunal of the Inquisition. He defended 
himself and his faith with undaunted courage ; and when the 
flaming torch was placed in his hand (as was customary at 
abjurations), he indignantly cast it at the feet of his judges. 
He suffered martyrdom on the Campo Fiore, in company with 
his pupil Tisserano. 

In the year 1543 there appeared in Venice a note- 
worthy book. Concerning the Benefit of Christ {Del heneficio 
di Christo), in which the Evangelical doctrine of justifica- 
tion was clearly and simply set forth. The book attained 
an extraordinary circulation. It is said that about 40,000 
copies of it were gradually scattered abroad. The Inquisition, 
however, succeeded in destroying almost all of these. For a 
long time it was believed that the book had entirely dis- 
appeared, but a copy of it was at last discovered in our own 
century (1855) in the library at Cambridge; this was imme- 

' GiAMBATTiSTA Falengo, in Christoffel's Lebens-imd LeidensUlder evange- 
lischer Mdrtyrer Italiens, Bern, 1869. Besides an account of tlie martyrdom of 
Mollio, this book relates tlie story of the martyrs Francesco Gamba of Brescia 
(died 1554) and Pomponio Algieri of Nola (died 1556). 


diately published, being also translated into German. Inquiry 
lias been made concerning the author of this anonymous 
treatise. It is believed to have been the work of Aonio 
Paleario.^ This man, who was born in the Pelasgic village of 
Veroli, near Rome, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, 
was at all events an important witness for Evangelical truth, 
whether or not he was the author of the little book in question. 
He was a lover of Humanistic culture, but was also impressed 
by the power of the religious ideas diffused by the Eeforma- 
tion. In 1543 he fell under accusation on account of his 
Evangelical sentiments, and received a warning from his 
friend Cardinal Sadolet. Subsequently (in July 1570) he 
also suffered a martyr's death.^ 

We have still to speak of the fortunes of the Evangelical 
Church in Locarno, in the province of Tessin, which since 
1512 had been under the government of the Confederate 
Cantons.^ Evangelical life had been awakened there in 
Zwingle's time. The confessors of the newly-awakened faith 
I'eceived Bibles from Zurich. The writings of Erasmus and 
Bullinger likewise found access to the town. The school 
teacher Giovanni Beccaria formed the centre of the little con- 
gregation, which, about the middle of the sixteenth century, 
numbered some two hundred souls. When, however, Beccaria 
ventured to preach publicly in one of the neighbouring 
churches, he incurred sentence of banishment. He fled to 
Zurich, where Bullinger received him with open arms. Calvin 
and Farel also interested themselves in the Locarnese Church, 
whose prospects, after the departure of Beccaria, became daily 
more threatening. In the autunm of 1554, the I'apal legate 
Biverta appeared at a Diet of the Swiss Cantons assembled in 

' The question docs not seem to be absolutely settled yet. 

- For particulars see Schmieder, in Piper's Evanycllschen Kalender, 1857; 
('. Schmidt (in Herzog's Realenc. xi. p. 47); and Jules Bonnet, Aonio 
Pideario, eltule sur la rej'orme en Jtalie, Paiis, 1863. 

^ [Tessin or " Ticino was conquered from Italy by the Swiss in 1512, and, 
under the name of the Italian bailiwicks, governed by deputies until 1815, 
when it was admitted as a member of the Swiss Confederation." — Tk.] 


Ijaden, and procured the decree that all of the Locarnese wlio 
would not return to the old Eoman Catholic faith should 
remove themselves and their possessions from the country 
before the following Shrove Tuesday. In order to the execu- 
tion of this decree, messengers from Lucerne, Uri, Schwytz, 
Unterwalden, Zug, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Glarus repaired 
to Locarno, and commanded the inhabitants to present them- 
selves before them. The Evangelicals made their appearance 
in a long procession, the men going before and being followed 
by the women, who marched two and two, accompanied by 
their children, and made confession of their faith. The legate 
strove in vain to induce them to recant, and they were obliged 
to leave the country. They set forth on their pilgrimage on 
the 3d of March 1555, and found a temporary asylum at 
lioveredo, in the Misoxer valley. The hospitable Zurich 
offered them shelter for a longer period. On the 12 th 
of May the main body of refugees, numbering 112 souls, 
arrived at the last-named city, some few having made their 
appearance previously. Others followed. The entire company 
amounted to 120 adults and 80 children. "A stone might 
have been moved to compassion," says an eye-witness, " at 
sight of this train." BuUinger, who frequently entertained at 
his table as many as twenty of these refugees, joyfully wrote 
to Calvin as follows : " These are honourable people who have 
sought an asylum with us ; our burghers are gracious and favour- 
able to them." The still flourishing families of the Orellis and 
Muraltos are, as is well known, descendants of these exiles.^ 

In Spain, the fatherland of Juan Valdez, whom we met 
with in Italy as secretary of the Viceroy of Naples, Pope 
Clement vii. had, in the year 1534, appointed Diego de Silva 
inquisitor. By De Silva's command, Eodrigo de Valer, one of 
the first confessors of the gospel in Spain, was confined for life 
in a monastery. De Valer, previous to his imprisonment, had 
inspired Juan Gil, Doctor Egidius, with his own Evangelical 

^ See F. JIeyee, Die evangelische Gemeinde in Locarno, ii. , Zurich, 1836; 
Pestalozzi, BuUinger, pp. 359 sqq. ; and Hekzog's Eealenc. xx. pp. 1 sqq. 


sentiments, and Egidius communicated the same to Vargas 
and Constantino Ponce de la Fuente. Egidius himself was 
incarcerated, and died soon after his release, in 1555. In 
.Spain, as in Italy, a little company of Evangelical believers 
soon banded themselves together, the first such society being 
formed at Seville. In 1544 a secret Protestant Church arose 
in Valladolid also. A year previous to the last date, Erancisco 
Enzinas (Dryander) published a Spanish translation of the 
New Testament ; a further translation by Juan Perez ap- 
peared at Venice in 1556. We shall revert at some future 
time to these manifestations of an Evangelical sentiment in 

We have finally to glance at the religious condition of the 
British Islands. As we ha"S'e already remarked, the historical 
connections of the Eeformation in England and Scotland are 
entirely different from those of the Iteformation in (Germany, 
Switzerland, and other countries ; and it will be necessary for 
us here to make a few statements illustrative of this fact, even 
at the risk of having to repeat what is here premised in our 
future connected history of the English and Scottish Ilefor- 

It will be remembered that Henry viii. of England assumed 
a hostile attitude toward Luther and his Eeformation. This 
attitude continued to be essentially the same. But a change 
took place in the king's bearing toward the pope and the 
lioman See when the latter refused to consent to Henry's 
divorce from Catharine of Arragon, the daughter of Ferdinand 
of Spain. The opinions of theologians, both Catholic and 
Protestant, to whom the king applied, were diverse, and 
Henry accomplished the divorce by his own authority, and at 
the same time separated the Church of England, which he 
took under his own protection, from that of Home. Bishop 
Cranmer, to whom we shall recur at a subsequent period, 
was created Archbishop of Canterbury. The cloisters were 
suppressed. In the matter of doctrine there was no change. 
It was even forbidden, ou pain of death, to teach or to believe 


otherwise than was prescribed in the royal Articles of Blood/ 
the '' whip with six lashes," as those articles were termed in 
popular parlance. Opposition to these ordinances cost Thomas 
Cromwell, prime minister of England, his life. Cranmer 
himself was frequently in danger of a similar fate, but by 
skilful diplomacy succeeded in averting it. In the year 
1547, Edward vi. succeeded his father on the throne of the 
Tudors. He was the son of Henry's third wife, Jane Seymour, 
and at the time of his accession was but nine years of age. 
Under the protectorate of the Earl of Hertford, Cranmer, who 
instilled the best Protestant principles into the mind of his 
royal pupil, was enabled to abolish from the ritual of public 
worship many usages which had remained inviolable in the 
reign of Henry. Images and crucifixes were removed from 
the churches. Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, and Bonner 
and Tonstal, bishops of London and Durham, opposed the 
innovations, while Bishop Eidley sided with Cranmer. A 
book of homilies, compiled (1547) by Cranmer and Eidley, 
in conjunction with Hugh Latimer, gave to the preaching of 
the word in the public worship of God its predominance over 
the simply ritual portions of the service. In the celebration 
of the Lord's Supper, the administration of both elements to 
the laity was introduced. Confession was left at the option 
of the people. Other usages, such as exorcism at baptism, 
confirmation, and even extreme unction, were retained for the 
sake of the weak. The new Parliament of 1548 conferred 
upon the clergy permission to marry. The Common Prayer- 
Book, published by Cranmer, established the liturgy of the 
Church of England. In order to the further prosecution of 
the Eeformation, Martin Bucer, and his pupil Paul Eagius, of 
Zabern in Alsace, were invited to England, and installed as 
professors at Cambridge. To the faculty of Oxford were 
added the two Italians, Peter Martyr Vermigli,^ of Florence, and 

' [The six articles, adopted in 1539, favourable to the Romish doctrines con- 
cerning the Lord's Supper, celibacy, and confession. — Tr.] 
^ See C. Schmidt in the Vdter und Befjrundtr, vol. vii. 


the Capuchin Bernardino Occhino of Siena. Bucer succeeded 
in gaining the affection of the young king, for whom he com- 
posed his treatise on The Kingdom of God. Under the 
influence of Bucer, a Confession of Faith was drawn up, com- 
posed of forty-two articles, which were subsequently (in the 
reign of Elizabeth) reduced to thirty-nine. The constitution 
of the Church was likewise established, so far as its principal 
features were concerned. But, on the Gth of June 1553, 
Edward vi. died, in the sixteenth year of his age, and with 
him the hopes which centred upon the success of the Eeforma- 
tion in England were carried to the grave. After the failure 
of the attempt to enthrone a Protestant, the youthful Lady 
Jane Grey, a grand-niece of Henry viii., whose reign lasted 
but nine days, and who atoned on the scaffold for the act of 
temerity to which she had been persuaded by her husband, 
Lord Dudley, Edward's half-sister, Mary, the only issue of 
Henry by Catharine of Arragon, commenced her bloody 
reign. In 1554 Mary was united in marriage to Philip, son 
of Charles v., and subsequently king of Spain, under the 
title of Philip ii. Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, was 
created chancellor of the kingdom, and upon Cardinal Eegi- 
nald Pole was devolved the systematic prosecution of anti- 
reform measures. Kidley, former bishop of London, and 
Hugh Latimer, bishop of Winchester, were cast into prison, 
and executed on the 16th of October 1555. Cranmer had 
been imprisoned in the Tower as early as 14th September 
1553, and died at the stake after having made a recantation 
[which, however, he retracted] on the 21st of May 155G. In 
our subsequent History of the Church we purpose recurring 
to the martyrdom of these men. For the present, suffice it 
to say that during the reign of Bloody Mary (she died l7th 
November 1558) no less than two hundred and seventy- 
three persons were sacrificed as heretics, five bishops and 
twenty-one clergymen being amoug the number. It was 
not until the accession of Elizabeth that the Keformation 
of England was consummated. 


A remarkable pendant to the English Eeformation is to 1)e 
found in the Eeformation of Scotland/ under the leadership 
of John Knox. Treatment of this topic must, however, also 
be reserved, as the period of Knox's greatest activity lies 
beyond the chronological limits of the present work. 

' Of the Scottish martyr Hamilton, mention has already been made in 
chap. xxiv. p. 153. 




IN opening the present chapter with general remarks on the 
Eeformation, I am well aware that a wide field lies out- 
spread before me, an expanse over which it is possible to roam 
at will, without ever arriving at a certain or satisfactory ter- 
minus. It is nevertheless a fact that every work requires a 
proper conclusion, and though I should not have much to say 
that is new, — though, on the contrary, I should but recall 
what has already been said, supplying some details, and 
indicating others in the most cursory manner, — ^I must not on 
that account withdraw from the task.^ 

The Eeformation, as we have seen, was not modelled after 
a preconceived design. It grew out of the conscience of 
Luther ; out of the wholesome sense and moral strength of 
Zwingle ; and, furthermore, out of the heart of the people, 
over whom the sparks scattered by the revivers of the gospel 
exerted an electric influence ; and, finally, by Calvin, who 
also was actuated by conscience, by moral and religious 
motives, the Eeformation was moulded into a world-conquering 
power. Hence, it is manifest that the men whom we call 

' Worthy of recommendation, as bearing upon the subject of which we are 
treating, is ViLLER.s' EssaisurV esprit etVinfluence cle la Eeformation de Luther, 
Paris, 1804 (new ed. 1851). This essay, to which a prize was awarded, was 
tnuislated from the French by Cramer, and published, with a preface and notes 
by IJeuke, at Hamburg in 1805. 



Eeformers did not primarily aim at effecting a reform in the 
individual provinces of life. The word reformation misleads 
ns if it suggest to our minds only the repairing of that 
which is in ruins, or the supplementing of that which is defec- 
tive, etc. Such restorations and supplementings had their 
place, it is true, but it was a secondary place. At present, 
however, it is precisely these secondary operations of the 
principles of the Reformation which must engage our atten- 
tion if we desire to answer the question as to what influence 
the Reformation exerted, designedly and consciously, or in- 
voluntarily and unconsciously, over these different provinces 
of human life. 

The operation of the Reformation was (we repeat) primarily 
of a religions character, in the truest and deepest sense of the 
term. It was the aim of the Reformers not only to alter the 
evident externals of religion, namely, dogma and worship, but 
also to effect a radical change in the religious sentiments of the 
age. Their aspirations were not limited to the alteration of 
any particular forms ; the desire to purify the spring of life, 
hidden deep in the breast of man, was what incited the 
Reformers to the conflict, and gave them courage to per- 
severe therein. If we look back to the history of Luther, we 
shall see that it was no isolated and abstract idea, withdrawn 
from the domain of practical life, and pertaining purely to 
the schools, that summoned Luther to the battle-field ; it was 
human life itself that seized him with mighty arms, and 
thrust him forth to the conflict. The corruption of the 
Church, the universal decay of religion, manifested most con- 
spicuously by the indulgence traffic, pressed upon the German 
monk like a many-headed hydra, and woke within him that 
herculean power which had before been slumbering unsus- 
pectingly within its cradle. Luther's resolve to inaugurate a 
reformation was not ripened under a sunny sky, or in the 
joyous banqueting hall (as may be said to be the case with 
the plans of the Reformers of our own century) ; it came to 
maturity in the dark and quiet cell of a cloister; amid 

368 HISTORY OF the kefokmation. 

anguish and tears was born the new man who, made strong 
in God, ventured to undertake a great, a gigantic task. And 
though the efforts of the other lieformers were not preceded 
by the same mighty internal conflicts which convulsed the 
soul of Luther (and it were folly to require tliat such should 
have been experienced by all), they also were moved by a 
consideration of the scrioiisness of life to oppose the prevailing 
abuses ; and the inner sanctification of man by the new birth 
in the Spirit was the goal toward which their labours tended. 

But though this one operation of the Eeformation is that 
upon which we must once and again insist as incomparably 
the most important of its effects, it would be improper for us 
to ignore or under-estimate the otlier, although indirect, work- 
ings of the Eeform. It is true that the Eeformation was, 
primarily, neither political nor scientific in its nature. Neither 
liberty of thought nor enlightenment, at least in the current 
modern acceptation of the terms, was the primary or, still less, 
the sole object of its endeavours. Notwithstanding that such 
was the case, however, liberty of thought and enlightenment, 
true liberality and true humanity, were promoted by the 
Eeformation, and promoted to a greater extent than they 
would have been by more direct efforts in their favour. 
There was afforded practical illustration of the deeper meaning 
of those words of our Lord : " Seek ye first the kingdom of 
God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added 
unto you." 

Let us now briefly consider these indirect operations of the 
Eeformation. Over ^jo/i^ics the Eeformation undeniably 
exercised a decided influence. It is true that Luther, as we 
have seen, strove to preserve the current of Eeform free from 
all political admixture, and he was right in thus striving ; we 
have seen, moreover, that in his dealings with the insurgents, 
he defended a system which we could not approve in all its 
parts even though we honoured the religious basis thereof 
But although Luther himself had no desire to make the Eefor- 
mation a matter of politics, it unavoidably became so through 


the force of circumstances. It is, for instance, a fact that it 
furnished occasion to the German princes to increase the 
power of the intermediate ranks, and to circumscribe the 
authority of tlie head of the empire. It was by Landgrave 
Philip of Hesse that the political side of the Eeformation was 
most warmly espoused, and by him many a scruple of Luther's 
relative to the propriety of an interference in politics on the 
part of the Evangelicals was overleaped ; while the princes of 
the Ernestine branch of the house of Saxony continued more 
obedient pupils of the Wittenberg theologian until the out- 
break of the Schmalkaldic "War, when Luther's warning voice 
was silenced. In consequence of this war, as we have seen, 
and especially in consequence of Maurice's attitude therein, 
the whole affair of the Eeformation assumed a political turn. 

In Switzerland matters were different. From the outset, 
Zwingle endeavoured to effect a reform in politics as well as 
in religion ; and while he fought against superstition, he 
also combated the system of foreign military service and 
foreign pensions. In Basel, as well as Zurich, the political 
and ecclesiastical changes lay side by side and in the same 
scale. Nowhere, however, did the Eeformation more deeply 
permeate the political life of a state than at Geneva ; and 
there, also, the political transformations that occurred were 
the products of a grand religious idea — namely, that of a 
theocracy. All these phenomena suggest the question, how 
far the Eeformation was simply the fortuitous cause of con- 
temporaneous political changes, — if, indeed, it had more than 
an external connection with them, — or how far the ideas of 
the Eeformation actually influenced the political temper and 
tendency of the age. In regard to the latter query, it may be 
remarked that a political conviction based upon Protestantism 
must necessarily have been of gradual formation, for the first 
influences of the Eeformation over politics were exercised in 
part unconsciously. Thus much is certain, the Eeformation 
was pressed into the service of politics, but the Eeformers 
had no preconceived intention of effecting political changes. 

VOL. II. 2 A 


Thus, tlie various forms of government which the Eeformation 
found established in the different countries in which it operated, 
remained substantially unchanged by that great religious 
revolution ; Germany and Scandinavia still retain their 
monarchical government, and Switzerland continues to be an 
aristocratic democracy. It may be said that in political 
sentiment Luther was a monarchist, Zwingle a democrat, and 
Calvin an aristocrat ; but their respective opinions harmonized 
with the circumstances in which God had placed them, and 
they conceived not the idea of altering those circumstances by 
a political revolution. 

Upon science the effect of the Reformation was still more 
immediate than upon politics. In considering this topic, 
however, we must not forget that the prime effort of the 
Eeformation was not simply to clear away scientific fogs. 
Although the Eeformation joyfully set foot upon the soil pre- 
pared by Humanism, its subsequent course was not always in 
accordance with Humanistic endeavours. In fact, the paths of 
the two. Humanism and the Eeformation, actually diverge. We 
know how anxious Erasmus became about the " good sciences " 
when the uneducated masses were seized with the mania of 
Eeformation (we speak from his point of view). It is as if 
we heard an Archimedes crying to the impetuous Luther, 
" Do not destroy my circles ! " Erasmus beheld in the Eefor- 
mation the return of barbarism. And yet, even in regard to 
science, the Eeformation, without originally intending such a 
result, outstripped the book-learning of Erasmus himself. It 
was, in fact, the Eeformation which created science, which 
caused it to become what we now understand by the word 
"science;" for if science consists not in a simple knowledge 
of things, Ijut in the knowledge of what is knoivn, i.e. in the 
free intellectual appropriation and mastery of the materials of 
knowledge, then Protestantism alone is compatible with a true 
scientific spirit. It is true that the Catholic Church has 
promoted partial enlightenment, and popes, such as Leo x. and 
Sixtus v., have actively favoured some grand scientific enter- 


prises; but Protestantism has operated decisively upon fehe whole 
treatment, critical and philosophic, of science. The Jesuits, 
for instance, following in the track of the Eeformation, have 
diffused much useful knowledge ; but it has been always of a 
kind which they believed could not promote liberality of 
tliought — such, for example, as the- mathematical, the so-called 
exact, sciences, which can be treated apart from all religious 
and moral speculation. But Protestantism' has promoted those 
sciences which affect the spiritual life of mankind, which im- 
plant and cultivate noble and liberal sentiments, and retro-act 
upon the great domains of moral liberty, upon th6 domains of 
religion and politics. As we have already seen, the spirit of 
the Pieformation at first addressed itself with decided predilec- 
tion to the study of the ancient languages, a field of labour in 
which Humanism, in reviving classical studies, had preceded 
it. There is, however, nothing fortuitous in the circumstance 
that our Eeformers availed themselves of tlie models of classic 
antiquity for the cultivation of their minds. Not only did 
the study of Greek assist them to an understanding of the 
New Testament in its original tongue, as the study of Hebrew 
enabled them to understand the Old Testament in the original ; 
but intercourse with the classics, that daily communion with 
them which accompanied the study of the Bible, gave to the 
Eeformers scientific stability and social polish. It may be 
thought singular at the present day that the most important 
theological works of that age were written in Latin, and that 
Latin was universally employed by learned men in their inter- 
course with one another, while frequent references were made, 
also, to the Greek sages and poets. But — we put the question 
to every one who is acquainted with the writings of the 
Eeformers — is there not something delightful in precisely this 
free and easy use of the Latin language, something attractive 
in the very style of the productions in which it is employed ? 
What enjoyment is afforded by a perusal of the letters of 
Melanchthon and Calvin ! We take, indeed, no less delight 
in the vigorous German of Luther and Zwingle, which, like 


the pithy French of Calvin, has its own peculiar charm. But 
we gladly follow Luther and Zwingle, also, when they too 
strike into the wonted path of Latin. The period of this 
general literary use of the Latin tongue was a unique one. 
It was a period of transition. Men of learning subsequently 
ceased to restrict themselves to a classical mode of expression 
after their vernacular tongues had arrived at maturity. We 
have already remarked upon the unnatural practice of amal- 
gamating Christian ideas with reminiscences of heathen 
mythology, a practice which Zwingle sometimes encouraged 
by his example. Even in the age of the Reformation, how- 
ever, there were some who doubted if a study of the heathen 
classics were consistent with Christianity. To the existence 
of tliis doubt we have noteworthy testimony.^ In the year 
1522, Felix, a son of Oswald Myconius, referred a con- 
scientious scruple of this sort to Zwingle, whom he honoured 
as a father. He wrote to him that he had read the classics 
diligently and had found in them much beauty and elegance 
of style, but also many unchaste and impious things, in which 
a Christian could not possibly take pleasure ; and he thought 
that moral contamination, rather than edification, must result 
from the study of them. He therefore begged Zwingle to 
request his father to let him learn a trade instead of tor- 
menting himself any longer with the ancients, and promised, 
on the other hand, never to neglect the study of the Bible. 
We know not wliat reply Zwingle made to this letter,' nor 
how much indolence may have been concealed behind the piety 
of the young man. But it is a fact that this question, as 
proposed by a student to Zwingle, has been again and again 
repeated in different forms. It may always be answered, 
however, by the assurance tliat a healthy study of theology 
cannot dispense with the Humanistic foundation, and that, 
consequently, ^^/wYo^o^y — '^■^•' ^^'^^ merely a knowledge of the 
ancient languages, but an acquaintance with classical antiquity 
in all its extent — is indispensable to the Evangelical theologian. 

' ZirhvjUi Opera, vii. {Epp. i. p. 2tJ8). 


Philology apprehended in this sense is a daughter of Protestant 
theology. Philology and theology were for a long time 
united in close bonds, not merely from custom, but also from 
a conviction of their intrinsic affinity and the propriety of 
their conjunction ; and although at this present day, by reason 
of the constantly-increasing need for a division of labour, the 
bonds which unite the two sciences have been steadily loosen- 
ing, a complete severance of them would necessarily kad us 
back to barbarism. Luther, with true tact, recognised the 
great importance of philological study, when he called the 
languages the scabbard which contains the sword of the 
Spirit. For us of the present day this speech, of course, is 
primarily applicable to our vernacular tongue ; but that the 
latter has attained to its present perfection in consequence of 
the study of the ancient languages, is a fact well known to all 
who are earnest and thorough students of philology. 

And what was the attitude of the Keformation toward 
2)liilosophy ? In our remarks on the character of Luther 
(chap, xxiii.), we show^ed that that Pteformer was far from 
assigning to philosophy a prominent place in his work, and 
that, on the contrary, he spoke most contemptuously thereof. 
For others was reserved the task of opening new paths for 
philosophy.^ We shall return hereafter to a consideration of 
this topic ; we must not, however, at this time overlook tlie 
meritorious service rendered by Melanchthon in his just 
appreciation of Aristotle,^ and the high importance which 
attaches to Zwingie as a speculative thinker has long been 
recognised. That, however, in general an original mode of 
thought, independent of all traditional school systems, was 
awakened by the spirit of the Eeformation, is a fact which 

1 See Carriere, PJnlosophische Wdtanschauinnj ini Reformations zeitalter, 
Stuttgart, 1847. 

2 Schmidt, Melanclithon, p. 676. Even Melanchthon regarded the union of 
religion and philosophy as the greatest ornament of a man of culture : " Nullum 
profecto majus decus hominuni in hac vita esse judico quam copulationem \ene 
invocationis Dei cum vera phllosophia, h. e. nature consideratione " {Corp. 
Eef. vii. p. 126). 


needs not proof. The whole history of modern philosophy — 
from Leibnitz to Kant, and from Kant to Hegel — bears a 
Protestant character. And it is the same with history. The 
institution of historical investigations was not the primary 
task of the Reformers. Their Eeformation itself constituted 
an essential part of history. Times like theirs, of historical 
revolution, must leave the task of recording them and com- 
menting upon them to posterity. The Eeformation had in 
many respects broken with preceding history, but it retained 
that historical foundation which the radical tendency of the 
age rejected. A Protestant investigation and presentation of 
history was reserved for after times. Nor did succeeding 
ages fail to produce this. A taste for historical criticism was 
awakened by the Eeformation. And tliough it cannot be 
denied that Protestant historiography continued for a length 
of time to be bound by confessional prejudices, it is never- 
theless a fact that the increased independence of opinion 
concerning historical matters, the large-heartedness which 
does justice even to an opponent, is a fruit of the spirit of the 
Eeformation.^ The idea of historical development is an idea 
of Protestantism, while the clinging to mere ordinance and 
tradition is characteristic of the opposite religion. 

What, again, was the attitude of the Eeformation toward 
nature and natural philosophy? It may almost be said 
that the latter had not yet come into existence. At the 
time of the Eeformation, the study of the natural sciences 
was in its infancy, and hence it is impossible to affirm that 
the Eeformation exerted any direct enlightening influence 

^ It is a fact patent to every one tliat the liistorical liorizon of the Reformers 
was a limited one, as was also their view of nature, its laws and phenomena. As 
the earth was to them the centre of the universe, so the history of Israel, and 
whatever is connected therewith, was regarded by them as the centre of the 
world's history. And there was, manifestly, much to warrant tliis standj^oint 
in its day. Viewed from it, the history of religions necessarily assumed peculiar 
importance. Only think of the difiiculties which beset the puljlication of the 
Koran in Luther's time ! See the author's essay on Luther and the Koran before 
the Council of Basel, in Beitrd'je zur vaterldndischen Geschichte, published by 
the Historical Society of Basel, 1870, vol. ix. [The view of the Reformers in 
regard to the history of Israel seems to be the true one. — Ti:.] 


thereupon. Luther, indeed, on several occasions expressed 
himself adverse to certain superstitious ideas of the astrologers, 
etc. ; but, on the other hand, he and his comtemporaries shared 
the same prejudices. Thus Luther, for instance, regarded 
whales and certain kinds of caterpillars as nothing but incar- 
nate devils. We have seen with what zeal Ileuchlin devoted 
himself to cabalistic studies. Even the otherwise clear- 
headed Melanchthon was himself not free from superstitious 
ideas, and (in opposition to Luther) defended astrology. He 
himself cast the nativity not only of each of his children, but 
also of friends and princes. His letters teem with observations 
on the conjunctions of planets, on the appearance of comets, 
and the like — events whence he drew conclusions of coming 
disaster, of plague, war, and dissension, and which frequently 
filled him with infinite anxiety.^ Calvin had more liberal 
ideas on the subject, and in 1549 published a tractate 
warning men against astrological superstition.^ Here and 
there we find, even in the age of the Eeformation, a sober- 
minded observation of nature ; as, for instance, in the Swiss 
Conrad Gessner, a natural philosopher and man of varied learn- 
ing, who died in 1565.^ The reform which was then in course 
of preparation in the natural sciences, was primarily independent 
of confessional differences. Copernicus (who died in 1543) 
belonged to the Catholic Church, and dedicated his great 
work, De orhium coelestium rcvolutionihus (1543), to Pope 
Paul III, His system was opposed both by the Catholic and 
the Protestant orthodoxy of those days. It was reserved for 
a subsequent age to clear up the relation of the natural 
sciences to religion and theology. 

It has frequently been charged upon the Eeformation that, 
while it indisputably promoted the interests of science, it had 
an unfavourable effect upon art. There is, doubtless, some 

1 Schmidt, I.e. p. 684. 

2 Stahelin, ii. pp. 353 sqq^. 

3 See the monograph of J. Hanhart, Winterthur, 1844. Felix Plater, 
Caspar Bauhin, Vesalio, and others are also deserving of mention in this 


truth in this assertion. The simplification of divine worship 
was attended, as has already been indicated, by a diminution 
of the direct ministry of art in matters pertaining to the 
worship of God. It happened at this time, as in the first 
ages of Christianity, that many painters and sculptors aban- 
doned their profession. This course was adopted by the 
painter Oporinus (Herbst), the father of the celebrated pro- 
fessor and printer of Basel.' Calvin was exceedingly averse to 
the union of art with worship,^ and in this respect was much 
more rigid than Zwingle, who was not altogether unfavourable 
to art. But although the j^lastic arts received a check for the 
time being, or were confined to the prosaic realms of reality, 
poetri/ and music, on the other hand, were cultivated with 
assiduity and success, especially in their union in religious 
song. Luther and Zwingle were alike lovers of music. 
Even in the age of the Reformation, both the Lutheran and 
Reformed Churches exhibit the names of some very respect- 
able composers. Thus, in the former we have Ludwig 
Senfi, Hans Walter, and Conrad Rumpf, and in the latter, 
Claude Goudimel, the musical adapter of the Psalms. That 
graver style of music which at a later period was reintroduced 
into the Church by Bach and Handel, is also of Protestant 
origin. The advantages which accrued to poetry and rhetoric 
through Luther's living words, through his sermons, his 
hymns, and his translation of the Bible, need not here be 
repeated. Nor did Luther stand alone with his harp of Zion. 
There gathered around him, in his own time and in succeeding 
ages, a mighty chorus of singers of spiritual songs. We will 
content ourselves with mentioning the following among those 
who appeared in the sixteenth century, viz. : Lazarus Spengler 
(died 1534), Paul Speratus (died 1554), John Gramann 
(Poliander, died 1541), Nicholas Decius (died 1541), Nicholas 
Selnecker (died 1592), Paul Eber (died 1562), Erasmus Alber 
(died 1553), John Schneesing (Chiomusus, died 1567), Nicholas 

' See OcHS, vol. v. p. 650. 

^ Kampsciiulte, p. 403; comp., howuver, Staiielin, ii. p. 393. 


Hermann (died 1561) ; in the Iieformed Cliurcli appeared 
Clement Marot (died 1544), who assisted Calvin in the trans- 
lation of the Psalms, for which Goudimel furnished the 

Finally, we have still to consider that most important topic 
of the influence of the Eeformation upon morals. In this 
connection, if ever, are applicable the words, " By their fruits 
ye shall know them." Against mere political liberality, as 
well as against a one-sided scientific enlightenment, it may 
justly be objected that, in their inordinate endeavour to 
release men from all authority, they promote the corruption 
of morals, the licentiousness and audacity of individuals, and 
thus undermine civil order and the peace and tranquillity of 
society. This, however, is not the case where the principle of 
religious reformation has struggled into efficacy. The moral 
regeneration of persons as well as of nations was, as we have 
constantly had occasion to remark, the real aim of the 
Eeformation. And history shows that this design was in 
great measure accomplished. How many abuses, perilous to 
good morals, were done away with ! ^ How many domestic 

^ On Marot, see C. Schmidt's article in Herzog's Eealenc. ix. p. 115. 

^ It is unjust to cite the numerous instances of coaj-seness which are to be met 
with among the Protestants as well as the Catholics of that day, as disproving 
the efficacy of the Reformation ; as unjust as it would be to bring forward the 
heathenish life of some who live in Christian lands as a proof that Christianity 
is without effect. Leaven does not at once permeate the mass into which 
it is introduced, and salvation cannot be forced upon men. The question is 
simply this : Where the principle of Christian Protestantism came into active 
operation, did it not exert a beneficial influence over morals ? That it did exert 
such an influence is made manifest by history. As to the fact, for instance, that 
even the rude military class was religiously affected by the Reformation, comp. 
Barthold, G. Frundshery, p. 71. More ofl'ence than should be given by the 
rudeness and coarseness which were a heritage from older times, may justly 
result from the double marriage of the Landgrave Philip, to which Luther him- 
self gave his corLsent. The occurrence constitutes a proof that the Reformation, 
at the time of its appearance, did not overcome all moral abuses ; some excuse 
for the transaction may be found in that ecclesiastical system of dispensation of 
which Luther was not the originator. The circumstances of the case were as 
follows : — Landgrave Philip was endowed with a strong and sensual nature. His 
wife, Christina of Saxony, who possessed but few charms, had little attraction 
for him. Philip was unhappy. At the court of his sister, Fraulein von 
Rochlitz, he made the acquaintance of Margaret von der Saal, a blooming young 
maiden, for whom he immediately conceived an affection. He was too honour- 


and pul)lic virtues were called into being ! Of the Eeforma- 
tion a twofold moral agency may be predicated — an agency 
of an external and legal nature, and a higher agency of an 
internal and evangelical character. Here, as in the prepara- 
tion of the world for Christianity, it was necessary for the law to 
open the way for the gospel. The mandates of the Eeformation 
were aimed at the abolition of moral effects, the establishment 
of public decorum, etc., and exhibit an exaggerated severity 
rather than any levity whatever. But these mandates and 
sumptuary laws, which, by reason of their very nature, were 
transitory, do not so well set forth the moral spirit of the 
Reformation as do those results which were the voluntary 
products of that spirit. How many lovely traits of humanity, 
liow much bravery and exaltation of mind, what enthusiasm 
for truth and right, developed side by side with human 
passions, and in victory over them ! The cloisters, which were 
abolished as useless, were replaced by beneficent associations. 
In Constance, for instance, there was formed a society of 
matrons and maidens, wlio had entered into a sisterly compact 
to render charitable services to the poor, the sick, the dying, 

able to repudiate his wife, but revolved in his mind the question whether it were 
not possible to have a second wife while he still retained the first. Seeking an 
answer to this question he opened his Bible, and found that the Patriarchs of 
the Old Testament, in addition to wives, possessed concubines, and that God 
did not censure this practice. He therefore asked himself whether, after all, 
monogamy might not be one of those human ordinances from which the gospel 
has made us free. In entertaining such a sentiment, Philip set himself in oppo- 
sition to the laws of his own land. He had introduced into his dominions the 
criminal code of Charles \., and that code was opposed to bigamy. In his 
difficulty he applied first to Melander, his court preacher, and to Feige, his 
chancellor, but subsequently sought opinions from Luther, ]\Ielanchthon, and 
Bucer. On the 10th of December 1539, the three theologians furnished an 
opinion which was exceedingly doubtful and uncertain. Polygamy, it declared, 
could certainly make no pretension to legal recognition ; but in certain cases 
and by way of exception it might be permitted ! Among these exceptional cases 
they reckoned the case of the landgrave. They advised, however, that the 
matter should be kept secret, in order that no offence might be given. Accord- 
ingly, in 1540, Philip caused Melander to unite him in loft-handed marriage to 
Margaret von der Saal, and Melanchthon was obliged (doubtless with an uneasy 
conscience) to be present at the ceremony. At first the matter was kept secret, 
but it gradually transpired, and became the occasion of great scandal and of 
much invidious remark. 


and to widows and orphans. The most distinguished and 
active of the women thus engaged was Margaret Blarer, a 
maiden who was as learned as she was pious and benevolent, 
and who was called by Bullinger the greatest earthly hope of 
the poor.^ 

In this connection it is fitting that I should say a few 
words in regard to schools. All the Eeformers, with scarcely 
an exception, exerted themselves in behalf of these nurseries 
of religion and virtue, for they well knew that the seeds of 
reform must spring up from below. Luther himself declared 
that if he were not a preacher, he would choose to be a 
schoolmaster ; and to him, in part, the noble calling of the 
teacher owes the dignity which justly belongs to it. In this 
solicitude for the prosperity of the school, the period of the 
Eeformation is similar to our own, and one is at first tempted 
to regard our own time as the more fortunate of the two 
periods on account of the important progress which it has 
made in educational matters. Who, indeed, can dispute the 
fact of this progress ? How many prejudices and abuses 
have been banished from the school since the time of Luther, 
and what improvements have been made in educational 
methods ! But has not every age its own prejudices, and 
does it not sometimes seem as if, in putting away old things, 
we were rejecting much that is good ? Is not culture often 
advanced at the expense of discipline ? When, for instance, 
we witness the endeavour which is now being openly made 
to sever all connection between the public school and the 
Church, to " emancipate " the former, as the saying is, — when 
we observe that in the education not only of youth, but also 
in that of the teacher, almost every effort is directed to the 

1 See Muller's Beliq. iv. p. 128. The achievements of the Catholic Church 
ill this direction— its associations of Brothers and Sisters of Mercy— should not 
here be ignored. The Reformation, in its charitable unions as in other respects, 
did but lead men back to the principles of the ancient Church ; or, in other 
words, to true evangelical principles. In this particular, as in others, however, 
the Reformation reacted upon the mother Church, inciting it to greater 


amassing of knowledge and the cultivation of the intellectual 
faculties, while moral and religious culture is neglected, the 
question will suggest itself whether the gain be really as great 
as we at first supposed. The mere mass of knowledge does 
not release man from the rudeness and sordidness which cling 
to his nature ; the nobler spirit which permeates the mass 
constitutes the true educative, formative element which makes 
man man. Without this nobler spirit of love to God and 
divine things which Christianity alone is competent to 
develop in fulness, knowledge truly " puffeth up," and pro- 
duces a conceited sciolism, whose unripe fruits our age will be 
long in digesting. 

On directing our attention, finally, to civil and domestic life, 
we discover certain facts in regard to diligence, industry, and 
cleanliness in Protestant countries which force themselves 
upon the view of the most superficial observer. In conse- 
quence of the abolition of superfluous holidays, the suppres- 
sion of the cloisters, and the discontinuance of ecclesiastical 
taxes, industry received a mighty impulse. Who was it that 
improved the condition of manufactures in Switzerland especi- 
ally, but the Protestants who had been exiled from Prance 
and Italy ? ^ and where, on the other hand, did the Eeforma- 
tion find more favour than in the industrious imperial and 
Hanseatic cities of Germany ? In Geneva, Calvin himself 
looked after the opening of new sources of industry, in that 
he endeavoured to revive the cloth manufacture, which had 
fallen into decay.^ Thus the intellectual power which 

^ The Orellis, Muraltos, and others, who were banished from Locarno in \b^S, 
brought with them to Zurich, where their descendants are still flourishing, the 
art of silk-weaving ; they established mills and dye-houses to enable them to 
pursue their trade, and increased the prosperity of the city (see Zschokkk, 
Gcschichte des Schwdzerlandes, p. 152). In Basel that branch of industry had 
already existed for a considerable time,, but in this city, also, immigrants be- 
longing to the Reformed Church assisted the older burghers in porfcrting the 
art. The use of the so-called power-looms {[Knnststiihle~\ Bdndelmuhlhien) was 
introduced by Isaac Battier, Jacques de Laehenal, and Fatio, in conjunction 
with the older families of the Iselins and Hofmanns (see Ociis, vii. p. 357, 
vi. p. 808). 

- Kami'sciiultk, p. 30. 


emanated from the Eeformation favourably affected even the 
material well-being of individuals and of cities. May this 
fact never be forgotten by those who are accustomed to value 
spiritual good things purely by their earthly results ! 

The jwMic amusements customary among the people were 
subjected to the discipline of the Church. There were various 
modes of procedure in this respect, the discipline exercised 
by Calvin being the most severe. While it pleased Luther 
that a bride should ornament herself on her wedding day, and 
be escorted to church with song and music, as the custom was, 
Calvin abolished all such fashions as heathenish pageantry, 
and also prohibited dancing. He likewise exhibited the 
strictness of his ideas in other ways, which need not here be 
mentioned. It must not, however, be forgotten that Calvin's 
position in Geneva was different from that of Luther in 
Wittenberg, and that of Zwingle in Zurich. Much also has 
been exaggerated by Calvin's critics. Calvin did not deny 
the people cheerful and decorous recreation any more than 
did Luther, although he could not take the same genial, 
personal share in such recreation that was taken by the 
German Eeformer or by CEcolampadius, the latter of whom 
once accompanied his people from Basel to Liestal to a 
church festival, and there delivered a suitable sermon. Calvin 
endeavoured to put a check upon the attendance at the 
taverns by establishing Christian casinos in the various dis- 
tricts of the town, of which there were five. These casinos, 
or abbeys, as they were called, were placed under the super- 
vision of special clerical and secular officers. A regulation, 
published in May 1546, accurately determined the requisite 
conduct of both host and guest.^ A criterion of the relative 
severity or laxity of the moral code of a community is fur- 
nished by the attitude of that community in regard to the 
drama and matters connected therewith. It is well known 
that Luther entertained very liberal sentiments on the subject 
of comedies. He did not think that they need be entirely 
1 Kampschulte, p. 446 ; Stahelin, i. p. 371. 


avoided, simply because they occasionally present impro- 
prieties. He himself took pleasure in the comedies of 
Plautus and Terence. But Calvin also, in the spring of 
1546, allowed some respectable burghers to perform a moral 
play. At this representation the whole burghership was 
present. It even took place on a Sunday, and the regular 
afternoon service was omitted for its sake. Soon afterwards, 
however, Michael Cop, another Genevese preacher, attacked 
the drama from the pulpit, and Calvin found himself obliged 
to take the part of the preacher.^ Plays were then prohibited, 
and the Eeformed Church was for a long time more severe in 
its judgment of them than was the Lutheran Church. 

Pinally, domestic life was enriched by the Pteformation, 
A\-hich gave depth and durability to the home affections. In 
proportion as religion ceased to be a mere external thing and 
made itself felt as a power in the soul, the fairer could be 
the growth of the household virtues. When the mother of a 
family knew that she could serve God better in the circle of 
her loved ones than in church at the daily mass — when 
parents realized that in giving their children a Christian 
training at home they were conferring upon them a greater 
benefit than if they placed them in a cloister, the invisible 
altar of domestic order and virtue could be securely reared 
upon the foundation of the word of God, which the house 
father taught his family to revere, and instead of lifeless 
jiictures there appeared the lovely, living picture of a holy 
family circle. The share which the suppression of celibacy 
had in elevating the dignity of married life and in humanly 
ennobling the clerical order, and the examples left us by the 
Eeformers in the capacities of husbands and fathers, have 
already been noticed. 

As might be expected, tlie Protestant family, like the 

Protestant school, was most closely connected witli the 

Church, and bore a strictly confessional stamp. The age of 

the Pieformation recognised neither mixed schools nor mixed 

1 Stahelin, i. p. 393. 


marriages. In this respect old Protestantism was fnlly as 
strict as Eoman Catholicism. Calvin declared that it was a 
" desecration of the family" for a man to marry a woman "wlio 
was infected with the godless superstition of Papistry." ^ 
Could he judge otherwise in his time and from his standpoint ? 
Our own age boasts of its large-heartedness and liberality 
in this respect, and we must admit that, circumstances being 
altered, the old views can no longer be unconditionally 
retained. But, as contrasted with the levity with which our 
advanced period overleaps religious considerations, and the 
thoughtlessness of its general treatment of matrimonial affairs^ 
the views of the Reformers have manifestly still right on 
their side. We must, furthermore, consider the spirit rather 
than the letter of their regulations. The spirit of the Pie- 
formation, in its severe as well as its milder manifestations, 
was the spirit of discipline, of order, of the fear of God, of 
subordination to God's purposes of salvation, as revealed in 
His word, and flowing from His divine love, wisdom, and 
righteousness. It is true that each of the Eeformers inter- 
preted these laws after the measure of his own understanding 
of them. That understanding, however, always reposed upon 
a solid foundation. 

Before closing this chapter, we must mention some of the 
tendencies which, in respect both to doctrine and to principles 
of action, departed from the principles of the Eeformers and 
essayed other paths. Not all who were at variance with the 
ancient Church and her statutes, agreed with Luther, Zwingle, 
or Calvin. Subjectivism was already asserting itself in oppo- 
sition to what Protestantism laid down as dogmas, as in- 
frangible laws of faith and morals. Mention has already 
been made of the Anabaptist, the Antitrinitarian, and the 
Libertine tendency. To these we shall not recur.^ We must 

' Kampschttlte, p. 462 {Epp. et resp. 216b, 217a). 

-Distinguished among the Anabaptists was Melchior Hofmann, a furrier; 
he was a native of Swabia, but early turned his face northwards, and at the 
commencement of the Reformation was residing in Livonia. In 1525 he was in 
Wittenberg, but went thence to Dorpat, and from tlie latter place he repaired 


speak, however, of a few persons who, without joining the 
sects and parties referred to, pursued tlieir own individual 
ways. Two men there are in particular who here deserve 
consideration — viz., Caspar Schwenkfeldt and Sebastian 

Caspar Schwenkfeldt was descended from the noble family 
of Von Ossigk in Silesia. He was born in 1490, and passed 
his youth at different Saxon courts. When the Reformation 
began to spread over Germany, he was sojourning at the court 
of Frederick li. of Liegnitz. At an earlier period he had, like 
Luther, become acquainted with Tauler's writings, and had 
drunk deep at the fountain of German mysticism. In 1522 
he went to Wittenberg and made the acquaintance of Carl- 
stadt. He preached in religious assemblies, but soon adopted 
other principles than those advanced by Luther, and even 
declared openly that nothing was further from his intention 
than to accept everything that Luther taught. Luther's funda- 
mental doctrine, the doctrine of justification by faith, occasioned 
him practical scruples. He had observed, he said, that people 
wlio had embraced this doctrine were morally not one whit 
better than when they were Papists. He did not oppose the 
doctrine in itself, else, as he admitted, he must have fought 
against the Apostle Paul. But the one-sided emphasizing 
thereof, the thrusting of sanctification behind justification, he 
could not approve. He maintained that by faith we are not 
only assured of the forgiveness of sins, but are translated into 

to I'luval. He preached for some time in Stockholm, and afterwards (after 1529) 
in Strassburg. He led in general an unsettled and roving life. His views of 
Christ's incarnation were similar to those of Schwenkfeldt. He held that the 
eternal Word did not take flesh of ov from Mary, but (literally) became flesh. 
The accursed flesh of Adam could neither have redeemed us nor have been to us 
food unto eternal life. He also opposed the Lutheran doctrine of justification, 
claiming that it nourished a false security. Although he rejected infant baptism 
(maintaining that it was of the devil), he withdrew from the Anabaptists, be- 
cause, as he said, " there were many rogues among them." As he did not cease 
to revile the Evangelical preachers, a suit was instituted against him at Strass- 
burg, and he was imprisoned. He was not put to death, but gradually sank 
into oblivion. David Joris of Delft, and Menno Simonis, the IJeformer of 
the Anabaptists, will be noticed hereafter. 


the divine essence itself.^ Schwenkfelclt found it as impos- 
sible to reconcile himself to the so-called material principle of 
the Eeformation as to adopt its formal principle. He had, it 
is true, a high esteem for the Scriptures, but he did not con- 
sider them identical with the word of God. The word of 
God he regarded as something living and intrinsic, something 
not held captive in the letter of Scripture. On the course of 
this word {De cursu verhi Dei) he composed a tractate, which, 
with other writings, he sent to (Ecolampadius, who wrote a 
preface to it (1527). Schwenkfeldt vigorously attacked the 
external religiosity and self-sufficiency of the Protestant clergy, 
who took refuge behind Luther's name to conceal their own 
nakedness. " The Lutheran preachers," he complains, " have 
arrived at such a pitch that they ascribe all that they do, in 
the exercise of their ministry, to God and the Lord Christ, 
whether their action be right or wrong, good or bad. Be the 
preacher a godly or an ungodly man, all that he utters from 
the pulpit must be the work of God — nay, God and the Lord 
Christ must, it is claimed, be co-agents with him ; and thus 
little distinction is made between the external service of God 
and His internal operation and power, between the Lord and 
the servant, between the sign and the thing signified, between 
God and the creature, and, furthermore, between the oral word 
of the preacher and the saving word of God." " The most 
painful circumstance of all," he continues, " is that they [the 
Lutheran clergy] are withal so secure and arrogant that, dis- 
regarding all the impiety of the present day, they persuade 
themselves and boast that since the time of the apostles the 
condition of Christendom has never been better than at present. 
To hear them, one would think that all that should be done 
had already been accomplished. We scarcely have come out 
of Egypt, and perhaps have not yet passed through the Eed 

^ He regarded faith as "an actual coinnaunication of God's essence to man, 
a gracious gift of the divine essence, a drop of the heavenly fountain, a ray of 
the eternal sun, a spark of the burning fire that God is, a communion aud parti- 
cipation in the divine nature and essence." 

VOL. n. 2 B 


Sea ; yet they think that we already have the promised land 
in possession, and they are therefore exerting all their energies 
to maintain the honour of their doctrines, in order that no 
division or heresy may assail them. Hence they would also 
l)ind all men to Dr. Martin's expositions of the Scriptures, 
just as the Papists would fain have the Bible understood 
solely in accordance with the pope's interpretation thereof ; 
and as Paul ventured not to speak or to undertake anything 
without being confident that Christ was working through him, 
so these preachers would have us say nothing in religious 
matters except what would please Luther. If, however, they 
should gain their point, and if we, in our reading of the Scrip- 
tures, should thus be driven away from our Master Christ and 
from His doctrine, and obliged to extol all the ways of men 
like ourselves, we would indeed be more miserable than we 
were under the Papacy." Schwenkfeldt had his own peculiar 
views on the subject of tlie Lord's Supper also, and set forth 
a new interpretation of the sacramental words.^ 

Schwenkfeldt's doctrines were embraced by others, among 
whom were Fabian Eckel, preacher at Liegnitz, and Valentine 
Krautwald, a canon and lecturer of the chapter of St. John 
in the same city. Luther treated Krautwald as a fanatic, 
styled him Stenkfeld in contempt, and called him " a non- 
sensical fool who is possessed by the devil, and neither under- 
stands nor knows what he babbles." ^ In 1 5 2 8 Schwenkfeldt 
was obliged to leave the land of his birth. He went first to 
Strassburg, and next repaired to Swabia, which was alread}' 
receptive of eccentric tendencies in religion. At least Schwenk- 
feldt succeeded in gaining some adherents in that country. 
But opponents arose against him even there. He was attacked 
at TJlm by his former friend Frecht, and was banished from 
tliat city, where he had remained for some time. Brenz and 

' He referred toZto to the Lreud, thus changing the subject of tlie sentence 
into the predicate. The meaning of the v.ords according to him woukl be : " My 
body is bread " (bread of life). 

- "To Kaspar Schwenkfeldt's messenger" (a letter of the year 1543), De 
^yETTF, V. No. 2185. 


Audreae also wrote against him, and Melanclitlion^ and the 
Swiss Reformers Vadian and Bullinger likewise opposed him. 
He found it necessary to issue a vindication of his tenets, 
which he sent to all the noted theologians of Germany and 
Switzerland. His doctrine was formally condemned at the 
convention in Schmalkalden in 1540, and he himself was 
nowhere tolerated, but was obliged to wander from place to 
place until his death, which occurred at Ulm on the 10th of 
December 1561. Notwithstanding the peculiar opinions of 
this man, his moral character was irreproachable ; his deep 
piety necessarily made a deep impression upon every unpre- 
judiced person, and his adherents, the " Schwenkfeldters," 
were for the most part good people. Schwenkfeldt did not 
cease to treat his opponents with meekness, and to pray for 
them when they cursed him. He was persecuted solely for 
his heresy. Besides the points already mentioned, this heresy 
consisted especially in his peculiar Christological views. He 
taught that we should behold in Christ not simply " God in 
the flesh," but also " the flesh in God," and spoke of the 
" deified flesh" of the Eedeemer.' 

We have before remarked that new paths in philosophy 
were opened by other men than the Eeformers. Sebastian 
Franck, who was born at Donauworth in Svvabia, about the 
year 1500, was one of the pioneers to whom we refer. 
Hagen^ speaks of him as one by whom the true spirit of the 
Eeformation was not only received and represented, but also 
carried forward, so that he appears both as the representative 
of the Eeforming tendency and as the forerunner of a new 
development of the human mind, as the man " in whom the 
ideas of modern philosophy were already existing in germ." 
Most of his contemporaries entertained a less favourable opinion 
of him. Luther called him "a blasphemer, the peculiar and 

1 Corp. Ref. viii. pp. 159, 285, 562, 633. 

- Hahn, ScJnvenk/eklii sententia de Christi persona et operc exposlta, 1847; 
Erbkam, Geschichte <ler protestantischen Sectcii im Zeitalter der ReJ'orviation, 
Hamburg, 1848; Hekzog's JRealenc. xiv. pp. 130 sqq. 

•^ Geist der Eeformation nnd seine Geijensutze, vol. ii. p. 31 4. 


favourite mouthpiece of the devil, a fanatic who cares for 
nothing but spirit, spirit, spirit, and understands nought of 
word and sacrament." He was certainly a man in whose 
breast there burned, besides the nobler flame of Mysticism, a 
wild, strange fire, and who on more than one occasion pan- 
theistically confounded God and the universe. God and the 
universe he regarded as co-eternal ; it is in the creature alone 
that God becomes truly God, he asserted. God is everywhere 
and nowhere. He is neither this nor that, but an eternal 
and infinite Thing and Good, without a name. He is all in 
all. There is nothing so small that God is not in it ; there is 
nothing so great as to be able to embrace and encircle God, 
There is nothing so small that God is not still smaller, nothing 
so great that God is not greater.-' This system of Franck's 
necessarily involved all sorts of antitheses. Everything, he 
declared, is good or bad according to the manner in which it 
is regarded. All things are in a state of eternal fluxion, in a 
constant round of appearing and disappearing. Sin and the 
punishment thereof are vanishing points in this process. This 
theory does away with the idea of moral responsibility, and 
discards at the same time the doctrines of the forgiveness of 
sins, redemption, justification, and sanctification, which together 
form the Evangelical system of salvation."^ Franck highly 
esteemed the Bible, but placed the book of nature on a ])ar 
with it. The book of nature he regarded as the living Bible, 
which preaches more eloquently than the dead letters of 
Scripture. He did not regard Scripture and the word of 
God as synonymous terms. Concerning the word of God, he 
entertained ideas similar to those of Schwenkfeldt, regarding 
it primarily as the intrinsic word, written by God in our 
hearts and inborn in us. According to him, the word did 

^ See the passages in Wackei'nagel's Lesehtich (Prose, i.), pp. 345, 346 ; 
IIagen, I.e. On the man and his writings, see C. A. Hase, Sebastian Franck 
von Word, der Schwarnvjeist, Leipsic, 1869. 

^ Hagen (p. 3.56) calls Franck the first among the moderns "who earnestly 
combated the ridiculous (I) idea of sin against God." To the Reformers that 
idea was not at all ridiculous. Comj)., however, Hase, I.e. p. 181. 


not become flesh but once ; it is continually humanizing itself 
in us. It is not bound to the " travis" of Scripture. Scrip- 
ture is like the reed, the envelope, the lantern which bears the 
light, but is not itself the light, the monstrance in which " the 
sacred thing, i.e. Christ (God's word), is enclosed and borne." 
All positivism, basing itself upon the letter of Scripture, this 
spiritualistic Eeformer abhorred as dead Pharisaism. In 
political matters, also, his sympathies were not with the 
written law, transmitted through the pages of history, but 
with the law of nature which is born with us. His ideas, 
though peculiar to himself, touch upon Communism.^ He 
was also opposed to the system of church establishment, and 
blamed Luther for basing so many of his expectations in 
behalf of Christianity upon princes. With acute irony he 
wrote : " If the sovereign be Evangelical, it rains Christians ; 
but if a Nero succeed your Evangelical prince, God help us ! 
the Christians all vanish, and away flies Sir Omnes, like gnats 
in the winter." 

Franck led an unsettled life. We find him in different cities 
of Upper Germany, in Nuremberg, Strassburg, and Ulm. He 
was connected with Schwenkfeldt and also with men of the 
Eeformation ; with the latter, however, he soon fell out, his 
ways being utterly at variance with theirs. He was unwilling, 
however, to be called a sectarian, and in fact opposed sectarian- 
ism as decidedly as the Eoman Papacy, and everything con- 
nected therewith. He had his own ideas and stood upon his 
own feet, and therefore was obliged to battle his way with his 
own arm. He endeavoured to procure his daily bread by the 

1 " The common God, in accordance with His nature, from the beginning 
made all things common, pure, and free. It is doubtless our duty to hold all 
things in common, even as sunshine, air, rain, snow, and water are common to 
all. As many children in the house of one father possess a common undivided 
property, so must every one esteem it just that in this gi'eat house of God's 
world we should fairly enjoy in common those good things which He showers in 
common upon us all, putting them into our hands and lending them to us only 
as guests. But owing to our perverted nature it has come to pass that this pure 
holding of things in common is pronounced impure." On Franck's Communism 
comp. Dethloff's Programm, Schwerin, 1850 ; and Hase, I.e. pp. 134 sc[C[. 


work of his liands, after the apostolic fashion, and was some- 
times a soap-boiler, sometimes a printer, and sometimes a 
turner. On being banished from Ulm, he found an asylum 
in Basel, where he died about the year 1543. In addition 
to his philosophical work [Paradoxa), his Golden ArJc, his Book 
scaled vjitli Seven Seals, and sundry popular pamphlets, his 
most noted works are his Chroniea, Zeitbuch %nd Geschichts- 
hibel, and his Welthucli (" Cosmography "), in both of which 
there is no lack of all sorts of marvels. He is the first, or 
among the first, by whom a history of the world was written 
in German. 

Opposition to Protestant ortliodoxy, such as we have met 
with in the case of Schwenkfeldt and Sebastian I'ranck, 
sometimes had the effect of leading the opposer back to the 
ancient Church, to whose authority he would finally prefer to 
submit rather than accept the doctrines of the Wittenberg 
theologians. Instances of such retrogression are furnished us 
by Theobald Thamer and George Wicel. 

Thamer was an Alsatian, a native of Eosenheun (Eosshain?) 
in Lower Alsace ; he, however, received his education at 
Wittenberg. At the latter city. Landgrave Philip of Hesse 
became interested in him and induced him to remove to 
Marburg, where he occupied a professorship during the years 
1543-49. He served in the Schmalkaldic War as a chaplain, 
but the sad experience which he then acquired in regard to the 
dissolute life of the people, made him doubt the moral power 
of the doctrine of justification. Especially repugnant to him 
was the stress which the Lutheran party laid upon the word 
sola. A faith destitute of good works he regarded (in accord- 
ance with the teaching of the Apostle James) as a dead faith. 
Living faith, he contended, must be apprehended not as bare 
historic credence, but as faithfulness, faithfulness to conviction 
(Jidelitas). He also combated the deification of tlie letter of 
the Bible. We are reminded of subsequent rationalism by 
Thamer's teaching that the Bible must find its corroboration 
in the reason and conscience of man ; he, however, dis- 


tinguished two sorts of conscience, the human and the divine 
conscience, corresponding to the human and the divine natures 
in the person of the Eedeemer. He held that the redemptive 
efficacy of Christ consisted not in His vicarious death, but in 
His doctrine and the example wliich He left us. 

After Thamer was obliged to leave Frankfort-on-the-Main, 
he proceeded to Switzerland, bearing recommendations from 
Landgrave Philip. Bullinger hoped to be able to induce him 
to return to the right way, but was disappointed in his ex- 
pectations. Thamer would listen to no advice. Bullinger 
laments over him as follows : — " He was so contumacious and 
unruly, screaming and refusing to hear the friendly counsel 
which was given him, that we agreed that we had never met 
with so disorderly a man, or one on whom our kindly efforts 
were more completely thrown away." ^ From Zurich, Thamer 
repaired to Milan, and thence proceeded to Home. At the 
latter city he formally returned to the Catholic religion, which 
agreed with his conception of faith and works better than the 
Protestant doctrine. He was at last appointed to a professor- 
ship at Freiburg, in Breisgau, and died on the 23d of May 

The case of George "Wicel was similar to the above. He 
was the son of an innkeeper of Vach, in Hesse, and " a very 
learned and able man," according to the testimony of his con- 
temporaries. He discharged the office of preacher at Niemegk 
near Wittenberg, and was specially concerned in the peace 
negotiations at Ptegensburg. Some have even regarded him 
as the author of the interim, but this supposition is incorrect. 
Wicel's ideas of Eeform moved in the sphere of Erasmus and 
the Humanists rather than in that of Luther. The doctrine 
of justification was particularly offensive to him, as was also 
the abuse of the term "faith," prevalent even in his time. 
He spoke with virulence of the Evangelical preachers, calling 

^ Pestalozzi, I.e. p. 464. 

^ Neander, Theobald Tluxmer, Reprdsentant iiml Vorcjdmjermoderner GeidcH' 
riddumjen, Berlin, 1842. 

392 HISTORY OF the refokmatiox. 

them two-legged foxes and boars, that spoil the vineyard of 
the Lord, crviucr and writing ever : " Believe! believe! believe!" 
What wonder is it that Luther, in his turn, called AVicel a 
serpent, " a faithless varlet, a most venomous and bitter 
fanatic!" As early as 1531, Wicel had returned to the 
Catholic Church. He entered the service of John, abbot of 
Fulda, to w^hom he dedicated the work which he composed in 
1540.^ He occupied himself in his learned seclusion with 
hymnological studies, and died in March 1573. 

But -not only from dogmatical reasons were these returns 
to the Catholic Church. iMany, of whom history gives no 
record, may have fallen away from the faith of the gospel 
from sheer inconstancy, or from motives of human fear or 
favour. One instance of such apostasy, and of the remorse 
^vhich succeeded it, is, however, preserved to us in the history 
of Francis Spiera, an Italian. Spiera was a lawyer and 
advocate, a native of the little town of Citadella, near Padua. 
He had there committed many offences which were a burden 
to his conscience. About the year 1542, he was brought to 
an acknowledgment of the truths of the gospel. His recog- 
nition of Evangelical truth seemed, however, to effect no moral 
change in him. On the contrary, he himself confesses that he 
placed his whole confidence in the merit of Christ in order 
that he might sin on unhindered, and he further states that 
he most culpably abused Evangelical liberty, turning it into 
licentiousness. Notwithstanding this, he felt himself called to 
preach the gospel in the public streets and market-places. No 
long time elapsed before he was accused of heresy before the 
Papal legate, Delia Casa, at Venice, and after undergoing some 
mental conflict, he made a public recantation of the Evangelical 
doctrine. His conscience then began to upbraid him. But 
the weakness of the flesh once more triumphed over the spirit 
of Spiera. Having returned to his birth-place, Citadella, he 
recanted, in the presence of the magistrate, the clergy, and 

' Typvs ecclesice j>'>'iori8. Conip. Neandeh, Dr. Georgio IVkelio, Berol, 


great numbers of the people, all that he had formerly confessed 
and taught, and was then, after paying a fine of thirty ducats, 
received back to the bosom of the Catholic Church. Scarcely, 
however, had he returned to his house, when he experienced 
the most fearful torments of conscience. He seemed to hear 
a voice saying to him : " Wretch ! thou hast denied me : depart 
from me into eternal damnation !" Still tortured by the 
pangs of conscience, he removed Avith his family to Padua. 
There he sank into the deepest melancholy, and lay upon his 
bed, struggling with despair. Physicians were summoned. 
But what could they avail ? Even Evangelical friends who 
visited him, among whom w^ere Piedro Paolo Vergerio and one 
Dr. Gribaldi, were able to effect nothing with their words of 
counsel and consolation. To the comforting passages of 
Scripture which they repeated to him, he always opposed 
other passages which condemned him. Even the intercessions 
addressed to God in his behalf by his friends appeared to him 
as manifestly of no avail. On several occa.sions he attempted 
to take his own life, and was forcibly prevented from accom- 
plishing his purpose. Unimproved and hopeless, he returned 
to Citadella, where, a few days after his arrival, he died, with- 
out having attained to inward peace. The impression which 
the hell-like torments of the despairing man made upon those 
who witnessed them or heard of them (Protestants as well as 
Catholics), was most profound. " Truly," said Vergerio, when 
he beheld Spiera's sufferings at Padua, "if the students do 
not forsake all the lectures to gaze upon this tragedy, their 
sensibilities must be exceedingly obtuse." ^ 

We shall now take a brief survey of the Eomish Church 
itself, as it existed in the midst of the struggle of the Eefor- 
mation. Of the resistance which it opposed to the Eeformers, 
and of partial attempts to reunite to itself those who had 
separated from it, we have already treated in the foregoing 
narrative of facts. We have made the acquaintance not only 

' SiXT, Paulus Vergerius, pp. 125 sqq. ; Cheistoffel, Lehens und Leidens- 
hilder, pp. 99 sqq. 


of fanatical defenders of inveterate abuses and of positive 
obscurants; besides such, we have found in the old Church 
men of enlightenment and scientific culture, and — what is of 
more consequence to us — we have also met with noble, pious 
Eomanists, men accessible by truth, and who were not far 
removed from an Evangelical conviction, men to whom we could 
not but accord our respect and affection. But the measures 
taken by the Church in general, to stem the inrushing tide 
of innovation, to lead the current of popular movement into 
its own channels, to vitalize and refresh Catholicism, are well 
worthy of special consideration in a separate chapter. 








THERE were two lines of conduct wliich it was necessary 
for the old Church to pursue in reference to the innova- 
tions which had made their appearance. On the one hand, it 
was requisite that the Romish Church should arrest the 
spread of the Lutheran, Zwinglian, and Calvinistic Reforma- 
tions, and that it should also suppress those heresies which 
were travelling on their own independent ways. On the 
other hand, again, it was imperative that the Church should 
manifest an earnest purpose on its own part to effect the 
reformation for which men had heen waiting since long before 
the appearance of Luther. It was necessary for the Church 
to examine and collect its resources — to balance its accounts, 
as it were. In short, it could not ignore the Reformation ; it 
must assume a definite position in regard to that movement ; 
it must arrive at a final understanding with it. It was im- 
possible that the Catholicism of the Middle Ages should simply 
go on its way as though nothing had occurred. A modern 
Catholicism came into being, forming a conscious antithesis 
to Protestantism. It is not our purpose here to relate the 
history of this modern Catholicism. We shall content our- 
selves with some few intimations concerning it. 


The revival of the shaken Church was effected at the 
CEcumenical Council of Trent. Its fresh uprising was, how- 
ever, assisted in an important degree by the new Monastic 
Orders which were founded during the period of the Reforma- 
tion, and above all by the Order of the Jesuits. The 
increased vigour manifested by the Romish Church was, 
however, the result not merely of legal regulations and in- 
stitutions, but also of the zeal of individuals like Ignatius 
Loyola and other less noted ascetics, who proved that there 
was still resident in the old Church an impulsive power 
which might be productive of new saints, according to that 
Church's understanding of saintship. It is to the three 
points here indicated that we propose to direct our at- 

Of the Council of Trent ^ we have already heard, in the 
foregoing history of the Reformation frequent reference 
having been made to it. Paul ill. having in March 1544 
designated the time of the Council's assembly, at the appointed 
season the Papal legates. Cardinal del Monte (afterwards 
Pope Julius III.) and Servino, together with Diego Mendoza, 
the imperial envoy, arrived at Trent for the purpose of 
making the necessary preparations. On the 13th of December 
1545, nearly a year after the time fixed upon for the 
beginning of the Council, it was solemnly opened, although 
there were present not more than twenty-five bishops (among 
whom were four archbishops). From the Church of the 
Trinity, where the assembly had convened, the procession, 
which consisted of four generals of orders, a few abbots, 
and some other ecclesiastical difjnitaries, in addition to the 
bishops, moved to the cathedral. There mass was read by 
Cardinal del Monte. Cornelio Musso, bishop of Bitonto, then 
preached a sermon, which was both devoid of taste and 

^ Besides the vmtings of Sarpi and Pallavicini, comp. Bungener, Histoire du 
Concile dt Trente, ii., Paris, 1847 ; Kanke, both liis Hist, of tht Reformation 
and his IJist. of the Popes ; Gieselek, Kirchengeschichte, iii. 2, pp. 505 sqq. ; 
II. Schmidt, in Herzog's liecdenc. xvi. pp. 369 sqq. 


offensive in its character.'^ Then, after singing of the Vc7ii 
Creator Spiritus, the synod was declared to be opened " for 
the glory of the Holy Trinity, for the extirpation of heresies, 
for the restoration of the peace and unity of the Church, 
for the reformation of the clergy and the laity, and for the 
destruction of all enemies of the Christian name." The singing 
of the Te Deum Zaudamus concluded the solemnities. The 
actual sessions of the Council did not begin until 7th January 
1546. It is these first sessions which have the most im- 
portant bearing upon our narrative, because in them, especially 
in the fourth session and the sessions immediately succeeding 
it, the system of belief and doctrine of the Catholic Church 
was established, in antithesis to the Protestant dogmas. This, 
however, was not effected without much opposition from some 
of the members of the assembly. Thus, there was resistance 
to the establishment of the tenet that tradition should be 
received as equally authoritative with Scripture. This pro- 
position was opposed by Bishop Nachianti of Chiozza, and 
Antonio Marinari, a Carmelite monk, both of whom were 
desirous that Scripture alone should be recognised as authori- 
tative. They, however, yielded at last to the opinion of the 
majority.^ In regard to the Holy Scriptures, there was pre- 
pared a catalogue of the canonical books, in which catalogue 
(in opposition to the practice of the Protestants) the Apocrypha 
of the Old Testament were included.^ Furthermore (although 
some few voices were raised against this measure likewise), 

^ There was a lack of taste in the bishop's comparison of the Council to the 
Trojan horse, and calling upon the clergy to allow themselves to be enclosed in 
its bell}'. There was a lack of taste in the preacher's apostrophe to the woods 
and fields of Trent, inviting them to hearken to the doctrine of the pope's infalli- 
bility. Actually offensive, however, was the speaker's declaration that it was 
of no consequence whether the clergy were possessed of moral worth or not, and 
that if they only opened their hearts to receive the Spirit of God as the parched 
earth receives the rain, the Divine Spirit could even now speak through them as 
formerly He spoke through Balaam and Caiaphas. 

2 Bisliop Kachianti made use of the word obediam only, and not placet, in 
expressing his assent to the doctrine in question. 

3 Luther, as is well known, did not exclude these books from his translation 
of the Bible, but he made a distinction between them and the canonical books. 

398 HISTORY OF the keformation. 

the Vuljjate was recoffiiisecl as the autlientic translation of 
the Scriptures, and the one tliat should be used in sermons 
and disputations. The right to interpret Scripture was 
accorded to the Church alone. It was thought necessary to 
establish this fundamental tenet in order to restrain individual 

In the discussion of the doctrines of original sin and justi- 
fication, the above-mentioned Carmelite, Marinari, gave vent 
to some utterances which closely approached tlie Protestant 
conceptions. Catharinus, a Dominican monk, and Seripandus, 
an Augustinian, also expressed similar ideas. The Arch- 
bishop of Siena, Bishop della Cava, and Giulio Contarini, 
bishop of Belluno, likewise ascribed justification solely to 
the merits of Christ, and to faith in Him.^ Notwithstanding 
this, however, justification, as a making just or righteous, 
was by the Council associated with sanctification, in antithesis 
to Protestantism, which separates the two. The necessity of 
good works was also emphatically set forth. In addition to 
the difference of Catholicism and l^rotestantism, the old 
questions of dispute between the Franciscans and Dominicans 
were occasionally revived, and the synod was unable to settle 
them. Nor did the assembly venture to pronounce a final 
decision concerning the doctrine of the immaculate conception 
of Mary, Ijut suffered it to remain as the former deliverances 
of the Church had left it. The sacraments were declared to 
be seven in numljer, and every increase or diminution of that 
number was anathematized. There were also regulations 
made which concerned the internal constitution of the 
Church, and in the making of these regulations, the Papal 
See was careful to permit no encroachment upon its authority 
through compliance with the demands urged upon it. 

We have already mentioned that in the year 1547 the 
pope endeavoured to remove the Council to Bologna, but was 
strenuously opposed by the emperor. It was not until 

' "Ad coLTceiula petulantia ingeiiia." 
^ llANKE, Rom. POpdc, i. p. 202. 


Julius III. had succeeded I'aul in. on the throne of the 
Papacy that the Council M'as reopened at Trent, on the 1st 
of May 1551. It was thenceforth presided over by Cardinal 
8. Marcelli, Crescentius, who guarded the Eomish interests in 
all points, and set his face most positively against every 
demand for reform. He was supported by James Lainez and 
Alphonso Salmeron, " as Papal theologians." The names of 
these two men will appear again in our notice of the founding 
of the Jesuit Order. In this session of the Council the article 
relating to the sacraments was again considered. The doctrine 
of transubstantiation and the doctrine of the sacrifice of the 
mass were confirmed. In April 1552 another adjournment 
of the Council was rendered necessary by the occurrences of 
tlie times, and especially by the advance of the Elector 
Maurice. There were no further sessions for a period of ten 
years, but the Council was again opened in the year 1562, 
during the pontificate of Pius iv., and was finally closed on 
the 4th of December 1563. The last two dates have carried 
us beyond our chronological limits. 

We shall now turn to a consideration of the new Orders 
which came into being during the age of the Eeformation, 
in spite of the opposition which Monachism was then under- 

We mention first the Order of the Capuchins. A strange, 
almost comical air clings to the narrative of its origin. It is 
related that Matteo de Bassi, a Minorite of the Strict Ob- 
servance, residing in the monastery of Monte Falco, near 
Urbino (in the States of the Church), had a vision, in which 
St. Prancis of Assisi, the founder of the Minorite Order, 
appeared to him and informed him that a pointed hood [or 
.capuccio] and a beard terminating in a point were necessary 
to complete the habit of the Franciscan Order. De Bassi 
and his colleague, Luigi de Fossombrone, immediately assumed 
hoods of the required form, and hence received the name of 
Capucini [hooded men] from the street boys of Ancona, who 
ran after them, attracted by their novel costume. We may 


content ourselves with the simple fact that De Bassi and De 
Fossonibrone are to be regarded as the founders of tlie 
Capuchin Order, which is, after all, only a branch of the 
Franciscan Order. Pope Clement vii., in 1526, conferred 
upon these two monks permission to retain the above-described 
costume, and to lead the life of rigorous recluses, on condition 
that they annually presented themselves before the Provincial 
Chapter of the Observants. The Duchess of Camerino, a 
niece of the pope, interested herself in them, and — through 
the influence of her husband the Duke — they were, in 1527, 
admitted as hermit-brethren " to the allegiance and protection 
of the Conventuals." On the 18th of July 1528, the pope 
published a bull regulating further particulars in regard to 
the Order.^ The first monastery of the Capuchins was that 
of Calmenzono, which was presented to them by the Duchess 
of Camerino. Their first chapter was held at Alvacina, and 
was presided over by Luigi de Fossombrone. The statutes of 
the Order were formulated on this occasion. The Capuchins 
were a regular mendicant Order ; they were not permitted, 
however, to beg more than would suffice them for a single 
day. Frequent prayer and the most rigid abstemiousness and 
asceticism (including flagellation) were enjoined upon them. 
Like the Franciscans, they had their vicar-general, who was 
chosen every three years by the chapter, their provincials, 
custodians, and guardians. The Capuchins were distinguished 
for their unquestioning devotion to the service of the Church, 
and for their self-sacrificing spirit. At the time of their origin, 
tlie plague prevailed in Italy, and they were pre-eminently 
active in caring for those stricken by the disease ; they shunned 
no danger of contagion in bearing the consolations of religion 
to the sick, in administering the sacraments to the dying, and 
in consisninfT the bodies of the dead to consecrated earth. 

As popular preachers, the Capuchins hindered the progress 
of the Reformation among the masses. From this Order, how- 

^ They then received the name of Fratns Minores Capucini, or Capucini 
Ordinis Fralrum Minor urn. 


ever, as from that of the Franciscans, some men went forth 
who added the weight of their influence to the Eeformatory 
movement. One such individual was Bernardino Occhino. 
In the year 1534 he quitted the Order of the Observants for 
that of the Capuchins, after entering which he distinguished 
himself as a powerful preacher of repentance, and was sub- 
sequently (1538, 1541) elected vicar-general. In con- 
sequence, however, of his vigorous assailment of the Papal 
religion and his earnest efforts in the cause of Evangelical 
liberty, he was obliged to seek refuge in Geneva. He after- 
Avards married, and passed through a variety of fortunes. In 
addition to the male Order of the Capuchins, there was an 
Order of Capuchin Nuns, founded by Maria Laurentia Longa. 
They were governed by the rules of the Clares.^ 

In the year 1530, a few pious ecclesiastics^ united for the 
purpose of establishing an association which should care for 
the neglected and destitute in time of war, and which 
should be ready to perform foreign or domestic missionary 
service. Clement vii. sanctioned this association in 1532, 
and Duke Francis Sforza accorded to the members thereof 
permission to purchase real estate in his territory. Paul ill. 
released them from the jurisdiction of the diocesan bishops, 
and placed them under the immediate authority of the Pi,oman 
See. Their society was entitled. The Congregation of Eegular 
Clerks of St. Paul (1535). From that time they were called 
Paulines. When, in 1545, they removed their residence to 
the church of St. Barnabas in Milan, they received the name 
of Barnabites. Their Order spread through the rest of Italy, 
and they deserved much credit for their efforts in behalf of 
the instruction of youth. 

By means of the Reformation, the moral evils not only of 
monachism, but also of the secular clergy, had been brought to 
light. It was high time that something should be done from 

' [The Order of Franciscan Nuns. — Tr.] 

2 Their names were Antonio Maria Zacharia, Bartolomeo Ferari, and Giacomo 
Antonio Morigia ; they were afterwards joined by others. 

VOL. II. , 2 c 


the Catholic standpoint for the elevation and moral improve- 
ment of the last-mentioned class. The idea of such a reform 
suggested itself to the mind of Gaiitano (Cajetan) of Thienne, 
in the Venetian territory. GaiJtano, who was an extremely 
gentle and peace-loving man, was by his modesty prevented 
from pushing himself forward as a reformer. It was his 
desire " to reform the world without any person being aware 
that he liimself was in the world." ^ He was frequently seen 
to shed tears o-ver the prayei"s wliich he offered for the welfare 
of the Church. But he wislied to do something himself foi 
its. prosperity, and consulted with his friends in regard to the 
matter. One of these friends was Peter de Caraffa, who was 
afterwards Pope Paul iv., but at the time of which we speak 
was still bishop of Chiati ; he was ordinarily called, in the 
Neapolitan dialect, Theate, from his bishopric (Chiati). In 
character he was the opposite of Gaetano, being impetuous 
and passionate ; the two, however, leagued themselves together 
in their deeply -felt need of a reformation of the Church. 
They both relinquished their lucrative positions, and, in com- 
pany with a few other friends, retired from society. They 
lived together on the Pincian Hill, near Ptome, in poverty and 
in the practice of strict devotion. They disdained to beg, and 
awaited at home the benefactions which good people conferred 
upon them. In honour of Theate, the Order received the 
appellation of Theatines. On the 24th of June 1524, it was 
sanctioned by Clement vii. The members of this Order took 
upon themselves the obligation of absolute poverty, and applied 
themselves to preaching and the cure of souls (especially 
among the sick and prisoners), and also performed missionary 
work, particularly in Tartary, Georgia, and Circassia. 

Another benevolent Order whose rise was connected with 
the reformatory efforts of Catholicism, was that of the 
Somaskers (Somaschers). Since the year 1521, Upper Italy 
had been afflicted with incessant war, and, in consequence 
thereof, with desolation, famine, and disease. A multitude of 
' Ranke, lidmUche Piipste, i. p. 174. 


orphaned children, who, in the providence of God, had been 
driven to Venice, lay uncared for about the streets of that 
city, their bodies and souls being alike in danger of perishing. 
The miserable condition of these little ones excited the com- 
passion of a noble Venetian senator, Hieronymus ^milius by 
name, or, as he was usually called, Girolamo Miani. Eenounc- 
ing his luxurious mode of life, Miani exchanged the senatorial 
purple for a frock which he had intended to bestow upon a 
beggar,^ and clad in this garb he went as a poor man among 
the poor. In his gondola he traversed the canals of Venice 
for the purpose of gathering together destitute children under 
his own fatherly protection. He next sold the silver plate 
which he possessed and the handsomest carpets of his apart- 
ments, in order to provide his nurslings with lodging, food, 
and raiment, and, above all, with good instruction. A house 
near the church of St. Eoque, in Venice, was converted into 
an Orphan Asylum. Nor was the noble councillor satisfied 
with this achievement. He did not rest until refuges for 
similar unfortunates were established all through Upper Italy. 
Wherever sacrifices were required, Miani led the way with 
his noble example. He erected an hospital at Bergamo. 
vSimilar institutions arose at Verona, Brescia, Ferrara, Como, 
Milan, Pavia, and Genoa. To ensure still further success to 
the undertaking, and at the same time to give it an ecclesi- 
astical foundation, Miani united with some friends in forming 
a religious congregation, which, after the model of the 
Theatines, was composed of regular clerics. From the city 
of Somaska, near Lake Lucco, these received the name of 
Somaskers. The Order obtained the Papal sanction in 1540,'^ 
and afterwards became the recipients of further privileges. 

While the Orders which we have just mentioned, with the 
exception of the Capuchins and Theatines, are unknown, even 
by name, to the majority of cultured Protestants (who ever 

' Helyot, Histolre des ordres monastiques, iv. p. 241. 

" The Order was subset^uently entitled, The Order of St. Majohis, from a church 
in Pavia consecrated to that saint which was presented to the ISomaskers. 


bears now of Barnabites or Somaskers ?), tbe name Jesuit is in 
every one's moutb. And yet many connect a bigbly unbis- 
torical idea witb tbat name. It would be possible for us to 
conceive of any of tbe before-mentioned Orders as founded at 
another time. The Jesuit Order, on tbe other hand, is the 
genuine double of tlie Reformation. From tbe very outset of 
tbe Reformation, tbe Jesuit Order bung upon its heels as 
closely as a shadow. Nor can we wonder tbat tbe liomisb 
Church recognises a special providence in the fact tbat at the 
very time when tbe upas-tree of heresy was planted in 
Germany, tliere sprang up in Spain tbe growth from which 
the antidote to tbe poison of heresy was to be prepared. We 
ourselves regard the appearance of this Order as no fortuitous 
occurrence, and we therefore propose to devote a full share of 
our attention to the consideration of its rise. 

Nothing can be more unbistorical tlian tlie idea tbat tbe 
system which we are about to consider was devised by tbe 
crafty brain of one who, though fully convinced of tbe intrinsic 
untenability and falsehood of his scheme, yet, like some 
swindler, extolled bis false wares to the world, in order tbat 
be might thus impose upon men and deprive them of tbe 
blessing of tbe Reformation. History teaches otherwise. As 
little as the Reformation of Luther was tbe issue of a pro- 
gramme hatched by the Wittenberg monk in his cell, to bless 
or delude the world (according as the movement is viewed 
witb Protestant or Roman Catholic eyes), so little did Ignatius 
Loyola forecast or foresee the extent of the movement which 
he initiated in founding bis Order. As, however, Luther, 
though himself unaware of the fact, bad in him tbe germ out of 
which the Reformation grew, so tbe personality of Loyola con- 
tained tbe conditions out of which Jesuitism should develop. 

Don Inigo Lopez de Recalde was the youngest son of tbe 
liouse of Loyola. He was born in 1491 (eight years sub- 
sequent to Luther's birtli, and eighteen years before the birth 
of Calvin), at the castle of Loyola, in the county of Guipuscoa, 
in Spain. Tbe house of Loyola belonged to the best families 


of the kinQ[clom. Io;natius, a son of the chivalrous Beltrande 
Loyola, was bred in the usages of chivalry at the court of 
Ferdinand the Catholic, and, like others of his rank, was of a 
worldly habit of mind, though at the same time susceptible to 
the religious impressions of the age. At the defence of Pam- 
peluna against the French, in 1521, he was severely wounded 
in tlie foot. During the painful confinement consequent upon 
this injury, he read, in addition to the knightly romances that 
captivated his fancy, histories of the saints. The deeds of St. 
Francis of Assisi and St. Dominic made a deep impression on 
his mind, and he resolved to follow in the footsteps of these 
heroes of the faith. Accordingly, he tore himself away from 
his paternal home and from his relatives, repaired to tlie 
isolated monastery of Manresa (Montserrat), hung up his 
weapons before the image of the Queen of Heaven, exchanged 
his warlike accoutrements for the rough garb of a hermit, im- 
posed upon himself the most rigorous mortifications, and held 
converse with the unseen world in a condition of ecstasy. 

It has been remarked by Eanke^ that the penitential con- 
flicts to which Ignatius surrendered himself in the monastery 
of Montserrat are suggestive of similar struggles undergone by 
Luther a few years previously at Erfurt. But how speedily 
the ways of these two men diverged ! Luther was led to the 
fountain of truth in the Holy Scriptures, and found consolation 
in faith in the mercy of God in Christ. Loyola hung, with 
all the ardour of his imagination, on Mary, the dispenser of 
mercy ; and when Christ drew near to him, it was not in the 
written word, but in the mysterious host of the altar sacrament. 
The worship of Mary and adoration of the most venerable 
Body of Christ are the two poles of his piety, and religious 
exercises are the expression thereof. The conflicts of the 
Augustinian at Erfurt led to his separation from the old 
Church ; those of the knightly monk prepared him to be the 
willing tool of that Church."' 

' Geschkhte der Piipste, i. p. 183. 

- A noteworthy parallel between Luther and Loyola was drawn in the seven- 


Loyola had, however, to endure many tests of obedience 
and hinnility before he ripened into the founder of an Order. 
He had resolved to make a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. This 
intention he accomplished in the year 1523, but failed to 
meet with the reception for which he had hoped. The 
Provincial of the Franciscan Order in the Holy Land ordered 
liim to return liome and there to study diligently before goings 
as his purpose was, as a missionary to the Mohammedans, 
whom he wished to convert. Ignatius returned to Spain. At 
the age of thirty -three he took his place among the boys at 
the school of Barcelona, and subjected himself to the discipline 
of the school. But the study of dry grammar possessed few 
attractions for him. Nor did he manifest much liking for 
the elegant language of Erasmus. He became absorbed (and 
here is another particular in which he resembles Luther) in 
the writings of the IMystics and Ascetics. Thomas-a-Kempis, 
above all, furnished his soul Avith the nourishment which it 
desired. After pursuing his studies in Alcala de Henarez 
(the ancient Complutum) and at Salamanca, he repaired to 
Paris [1528]. In Spain he had been suspected of belonging 
to the dangerous society of the Illurainati (Alurnbeados). At 
Paris he entered Montaigu College, the same (as Ave have 
already seen) that Calvin had attended. It was also in Paris 
that, in 1534, Loyola, after receiving the degree of Master of 
Arts, united with his two room-mates in the College of St. 
Barljara — Peter le Pevre of Savoy, and Francis Xavier, a young 
nobleman of Navarre — in forming a religious society, which was 
joined by two other young Spaniards — James Lainez of 
Almanzan, and Alphonso Salmeron of Toledo. The society 
soon received the further accession of two other members 
— Nicholas Bobadilla, a Spaniard, and a Portuguese named 
Rodriguez. These seven men assembled in the church of 
Montmartre on the 15th of August 1534, and took a vow to 

teenth century by the Jesuit James Doniiiums in liis Synopsis Idstorice Societatis 
Jesu prima scecuIo, Tomaci (Tournay), 1640. See Gklzei-.'s Monatsblatter, 
Dec. 1859, pp. 1 sqq. 


renounce the world, and to perform a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. 
After the society had been further strengthened by the addi- 
tion of a few other members (some Frenchmen had united 
with it), and they had together been ordained priests at 
Venice in 1537,^ they made application to the Papal See for 
the confirmation of their association. Paul III. complied with 
their desire in 1540 in the Bull Rcgimini militantis. The 
intent of the new Order was declared to be the preservation 
and dissemination of the Christian faith. In addition to the 
ordinary monastic vows of poverty and chastity, the members 
of the Order were obliged to promise unconditional obedience 
to the Koman See. They must engage to perform whatever 
the ]3ontiff should command them, to proceed without objec- 
tion or delay to whatever land he should ordain — to Turks, 
heathen, or heretics. When the question arose as to what 
name the new Order should bear, Ignatius being unwilling 
that it should be called after him, its members assumed the 
name of the Founder of Christianity, and called themselves the 
Society of Jesus (Jesuits). Instead of Jesuiten [Jesuits], the 
Protestants humorously termed them Jesuividcr [against Jesus]. 
The influence of the new society in ecclesiastical matters 
was immediately perceptible. As soon as the young men had 
received priestly ordination at Venice in 1537, they made 
their debut as popular preachers in the territory of the 
republic, and met with much favour. They preached, as 
Farel and other Protestants were accustomed to do, in the 
streets and market-places, using a curious mixture of Italian 
and Spanish, which heightened the charm of their discourse. 
They gained access to houses and hospitals. They also 
endeavoured to accpiire an influence over youth, and particu- 
larly over students. At Eome, Ignatius distributed his 
adherents in the various churches. He had been instructed 
in a vision that Christ would be specially gracious to himself 
and his followers in Eome {Romce vobis ^i^opitms ero). From 

' ["Ignatius, however, deferred his own ordination until Christmas Day 
1538 " (Appleton's Neiv Anc. CycL, title " Loyola "). — Tr.] 


the last-mentioned city some of the disciples of Loyola pro- 
ceeded to Brixen, in the Tyrol, to Parma, Piacenza, and 
Calabria. The Jesuits gained a foothold in Germany likewise, 
especially in Austria and Bavaria. The city of Ingolstadt in 
Bavaria was assigned them by Duke William iv. in 1556. 
At about the Sfime time Cologne threw open its gates to them. 
On the other hand, the Parliament of France was at first 
opposed to their reception, but they succeeded, nevertheless, in 
gaining access to that kingdom. Lyons was the seat of their 
first settlement. But Europe did not satisfy the missionary 
zeal of the Order. The thoughts of its founder, from the 
outset of his mona stic career, had travelled across the waters. 
In the year 1540, at the desire of John ill., king of Portugal, 
two members of the Order, Eodriguez and Xavier, repaired to 
the East Indies, and soon afterwards (in 1542) a Jesuit 
college was established at Goa, the capital of the Portuguese 
possessions. A new favour was conferred upon the Order in 
1543 by an enactment of Paul in., providing that the society 
might receive as many members as it would, though at first 
the number was limited to sixty. Two years subsequently the 
Jesuits received permission to preach in all churches and on 
public squares, to hear confessions, to absolve persons of every 
rank, and even to pardon those sins whose forgiveness had 
previously pertained to the Apostolic See exclusively. In 
1549 their possessions were declared exempt from tithes, and 
still further privileges were accorded them. Ignatius died on 
the 31st of July 155G. Soon after the establishment of the 
Order which he founded, he was elected general thereof. He 
accepted tliis position from motives of obedience only, and as 
an exercise of liumility went immediately into the kitchen of 
the monastery, there to serve as scullion. At the time of his 
death, the Order could already boast of one thousand members 
and one hundred colleges.^ Of the thirteen provinces into 

' Of course Ignatius was elevated to tlie rank of saint after his death. His 
canonization took place under Gregory xv. (13th March 1623) and Urban viir. 
(6th August of the same year). His festival falls on the 31st of July. No one, 


wliicli it was divided, seven were to be found on the Pyrenean 
Peninsula, three in Italy, one in Prance, and two in Germany. 

"With the exception of the two great mendicant Orders of 
the Middle Acjes, no religious Order has ever existed whose 
importance has in degree approached that of the Order of the 
Jesuits. It has far surpassed even its prototypes instituted 
by St. Dominic and St. Prancis. The spirit of the Order, its 
institutions, its principles, its efforts, and the results accom- 
j)lished by it, w^e shall become acquainted with at some future 
time. Por the present, this notice of its founding will suffice. 

To complete the picture of the Catholic Church during the 
age of the Keformation, we shall introduce here two portraits, 
which will show that in the midst of this season of defection 
from Eome and its legal religion, the old stern penitential 
system still possessed some original representatives, deeply 
imbued with mediaeval Mysticism. 

One such original ascetic was the Plorentine, Philip of ISTeri, 
whom Gothe called " a humorous saint," and to whom he has 
paid a genial tribute in his writings.^ Philip was born on 
the 2 2d of July 1515, and was the scion of a good family. 
He was distinguished even as a boy for his rare piety. He 
studied at Eome in the year 15o3, but soon abandoned his 
studies because they did not lead him to that salvation for 
which he longed. He sold his school-books that he might 
know nothing but Christ. He believed that he had a 
sensuous perception of the streams of grace which poured 
down upon him from above while he lay prostrate in prayer 
before God. Frequently he would cry out : " Enough, Lord ! 
Eestrain the torrents of Thy grace." On some occasions he 
felt constrained to give vent to his inward ardour by rending 
his garments. In prostrating himself before the altar, he 
broke two of his ribs, which injury occasioned him palpitation 
of the heart during the remainder of his life. He declared, 

it was declared, had deprived the devil of so many souls as he, insomuch that 
his success in this particular had occasioned an uproar in hell. 

^ See Gothe's Werke (12mo edition), xxxviii. p. 249, and xxxix. p. 190. 


however, tliat he had been wounded by divine love. On the 
23d of May 1551, he was ordained to the priesthood. In 
company with some congenial spirits, he instituted a series of 
meetings for devotional exercises. At these prayer meetings 
(oratories) religious songs were sung, and hence the musical 
terra " oratorio," as applied to dramatized religious music.^ 
The nature of Philip was thoroughly practical. All dogmatical 
or speculative discourses, all discussions of subtle questions, 
were excluded from his devotional assemblies. His worship 
of God consisted in the care of the poor and the sick. Twice 
a week Neri, with his companions, visited the neglected 
hospitals. He introduced a cheerful piety into the dismal 
chambers of the sick. He recommended the avoidance of 
melancholy and of a downcast demeanour, and required that 
every duty should be performed cheerfully. " Be cheerful, or 
all thou doest is nought," was his chosen motto. Another 
saying, which he borrowed from St. Bernard, was : "To despise 
the world, to despise no one, to despise oneself, and to 
despise being despised.""^ With the greatest good humour 
he took upon himself the performance of the meanest offices, 
and cared nothing when people called him a fool; on the 
contrary, by his singular appearance he tempted the world to 
deride him. He had friends among the Jesuits. Although 
contemporary with the Eeformation, he survived it by a 
number of years, dying in 1595 at the age of eighty. 

A less genial, if not exactly a gloomy character was that 
of the Spaniard, Peter of Alcantara. He was born in 1499 in 
Estremadura, and sprang, like Loyola, of & noble race. Even 
as a cliild he exhibited great fondness for prayer. He would 
possess himself of the key of the house chapel, and secretly 
resort thither to perform his devotions. When he came from 

' ["Its origin" (that of tlie oratorio) "has generally been ascribed to St. 
riiilip Ncri, who in 1540 founded the congregation of the Oratory in Rome 
(whence the term oratorio), one of the objects of which was to deter young people 
from profane amusements by rendering religious services as attractive as possible " 
(Aitlkton's New Anc. CycL, title "Oratorio"). — Tr.] 

'■^ Sycrnere mundum, si')erntre nemlnem, spernere seipsum, sperncre se sperni. 


school, he was wont to hasten to the nearest church, where he 
frequently remained for hours on his knees before the crucifix 
or the host, absorbed in the most profound devotion. He 
continued this manner of life as a student at Salamanca, 
whither he repaired after he had completed his fourteenth year. 
At Alcantara he entered the Franciscan Order of John of 
Guadaloupe (who died in 1506). In the monastery of San 
Francesco de Monseretes, he soon exceeded all the other 
monks in the rigour of his asceticism. So absorbed would 
he become in his religious exercises, that he would not be 
aware of what was passing around him. On his transfer to 
another cloister in North Estremadura, he afflicted himself 
still more severely, if possible. When disciplining himself in 
the night watches to the melancholy accompaniment of the 
Miserere or the De profuiulis, he wielded the scourge so man- 
fully and sang in so mournful and penetrating a tone as to 
arouse the neighbourhood from sleep. In one of his fits of 
ecstasy (so it was believed), he was lifted several feet above the 
earth, and hovered, with outstretched arms, suspended in the 
air, as persons occasionally dream of doing. When but 
twenty years old, lie was the spiritual director of more than 
one Spanish count, and in 1519 he received from the Pro- 
vincial of the Franciscan Obsei-vant-province of Estremadura 
permission to found a new monastery of Observants at Badajoz. 
For this purpose it was necessary to erect a building, and Peter 
himself assisted in the mason work. He gave evidence of his 
humility by washing the feet of the monks. When about to 
receive priestly ordination, he prepared himself for the rite by 
further mortifications of the flesh, after first expressing his 
reluctance to become a recipient of the ordinance. He wept 
as he read mass for the first time. His first sermon (on 
Prayer) was a powerful and thrilling discourse. He was 
appointed guardian of the monastery of Our Lady de Los 
Angelos, which was situated in a valley near Babredillo, on 
the northern boundary of Estremadura. A few days before 
Christmas, a heavy fall of snow separated this monastery from 


the rest of the world, and the stock of provisions became 
exhausted ; at this juncture, while the holy Peter was praying 
in his cell, the bell of the cloister was heard to ring, and 
when the monks had shovelled their way to the gate, they 
found baskets containing food awaiting them. After a short 
time, Peter was created guardian of his Order at Badajoz. 
There he composed a treatise On Prayer, which is his only 
production of any considerable note that remains to us. He 
next visited Portugal, in compliance with the invitation of King 
John III. He won the Infanta Donna Maria for the Order of 
St. Francis, and converted many of the courtiers — among others 
the Duke of Braganza, the Duke of Aveiro, and the Marquis 
of Nizza. When invited to court, he played the fool, having 
sewed particoloured rags on his habit ; his conduct was, how- 
ever, regarded as the originality of a saint, in whom the 
greatest oddities are excusable. He established a hermitage 
in the Sierra di Arabida, a few miles south of the spot 
where the Tagus discharges its waters into the ocean. 
From 1538 to 1542 he was Provincial of his Order. 
He travelled barefooted through the provinces for the purpose 
of reforming the cloisters. Everywhere he set the example of 
humility. After his term of service had expired, he withdrew 
once more to his hermitage, accompanied by his pupil, Michael 
de Catena. But the Lutheran heresy, which was diffusing 
itself in his neighbourhood, summoned him to the conflict. 
In company with his associate, he repaired to Pome in 1554, 
during the pontificate of Julius III., and endeavoured to bring 
about a reform in his Order. Returning to Spain, he erected 
at Placentia a model monastery after his own mind. This 
cloister was intended to resemble a grave. It was 32 feet 
long and 28 feet wide, and was designed to accommodate 
twelve monks. The cells and doors were narrow. No 
images were tolerated in the chapel, as they were declared 
to be rather a hindrance than a help to devotion. In this 
puritanical strictness, Peter of Alcantara resembled Calvin. 
Other monasteries were built after the same plan. I'eter 


subsequently travelled much about the country, and en- 
countered some opposition from unreformed brethren of his 
Order, all of which, however, he endured with patience. 
Miracles are said to have been performed by him. He died 
18th October 1562, in a monastery of his Order at Arenas. 
A pleasant odour diffused itself through his death -chamber, 
and the melody of angelic choirs was heard in the air. He 
was afterwards enrolled in the canon of saints.^ 

As a companion piece to the portrait of this rigorous man, 
we have now to sketch the character of a woman, St. Theresa 
of Jesus. In her, as in Loyola, Catholic historiography be- 
holds an antidote to the Lutheran heresy. Instead of the 
thorn, it is declared, came up the fir tree, and instead of the 
brier came up the myrtle tree (Isa. Iv. 13). Theresa was 
born at Avila in Old Castile, on the 25th of March 1515. 
Her parents belonged to the nobility, and were very pious, 
after the fashion of their fathers. Little Theresa early took 
delight in the legends and devotional exercises of the Church. 
She prepared herself a little hermitage in her garden, was 
kind to the poor, and prayed diligently. "When her mother 
died, she cast herself weeping before the image of the mother 
of God, who was thenceforth to be her mother also. After 
the marriage of her only sister, her father placed her in a 
nunnery where the daughters of families of rank received 
their education. There Theresa's liking for a convent life 
matured, being strengthened especially by the writings of St. 
Jerome. Without the knowledge of her father, she one day 
entered the Society of Carmelite Nuns as a novice, and took 
the vows of that Order in November 1534. She had just 
recovered from a severe illness when her father died. Among 
the men who, together with the Confessions of St. Avgustine, 
exercised the most powerful influence over her mind, was 
Peter of Alcantara. As the latter aimed at reforming the 
Franciscan Order, so Theresa bent her thoughts upon improv- 

^ He was canonized by Gregory xv., 1622, and by Clement x., 1669. Comp. 
Z'JCKLEU in the Lutherische Zeitschrift, 1864, i. 


ing the Order of Carmelitesses — i.e., upon increasing tlie 
severity of its rules. She became the foundress of a branch 
Order of these nuns, that of the " Unshod Carmelitesses," for 
whom, after much difficulty, she had a sjoecial convent built, 
which was called the Convent of St. Joseph (1562). Theresa 
died at the age of sixty-seven, on the 5th (loth) of October 
1582. Her eyes, as she lay dying, were constantly fixed 
upon the crucifix which she held in her hands. The Duchess 
of Alba, who, shortly before the death of this holy woman, 
had summoned her to her vicinity, erected a splendid monu- 
ment to her memory. Theresa also distinguished herself as 
an authoress. In her forty-eighth year she penned, by the 
advice of her confessor, a history of the development of her 
inner life, in which narrative, as clearly as in a mirror, her 
God-centred character may be seen.^ 

We have no more time at present to devote to these saintly 
personages, but shall recur to these and kindred characters in 
our history of the anti-Reformation in the second half of the 
sixteenth century. It has been our purpose to demonstrate, 
by the facts which we have already communicated, the striving 
of an earnest, heart-felt piety, and a deep though one-sided 
understanding of religious things to assert their existence, 
even in connection with the transmitted system of belief 
and its ecclesiastical forms. 

But, finally, it is a fact which we must not pass over in 
silence, that the Eomish Church opposed the innovations which 
she disapproved not only by a species of religious rivalry, 
but also, in accordance with her time-honoured j)ractice, 
with the weapons of violence. We have already cited suffi- 
cient instances of her severity, and shall become acquainted 
with still more horrible deeds performed under her sanction 
when we arrive at the history of the anti-Eeform movement. 
In the meantime, let us revert for a moment to the institution 

' Hamberger, Stimmen aus dem HeUUjthum drr chri.stHrlien mynllk und 
Tlieosophie, Stuttgart, 1857, vol. i. pp. ISO wp). ; ZuciCLEii, in the Lutherisclw 
Ztltschrift, 1865, ii. [Api'LETon's Cyd.\ 


of the Inquisition, of which we have already treated in our 
History of the Church in the Middle Ages} Caraffa and 
Burgos, in consideration of the lieformation, persuaded Pope 
Paul III. to establish a supreme tribunal of Inquisition at 
Eome, to which all other spiritual courts should be sub- 
ordinate. As St. Peter quelled the first heresiarch, Simon 
Magus, at Eome,^ so it was claimed the successor of Peter 
must from Eome subdue all heretics. On the 21st of July 
1542, the pontiff issued a bull proclaiming six cardinals, 
Caraffa and Toledo among the number, commissioners of the 
Apostolic See, and general inquisitors on both sides of the 
Alps. These dignitaries were authorized to invest other 
ecclesiastics with similar power in such places as they deemed 
expedient. All matters without distinction were declared 
subject to their jurisdiction. They were unconditionally 
privileged to inflict capital punishment ; they could not 
pardon, for the pope reserved that right to himself. By order 
of Cardinal Caraffa, a house was immediately fitted up at 
Eome for the purposes of the Inquisition, and furnished with 
secure dungeons, with appropriate locks and bolts. The efforts 
of the holy office of the Inquisition {il sacra ufizio delV in- 
quisitione) were directed not only against tliose who were 
suspected of Protestantism, but against all who betrayed a 
leaning toward innovations of any sort. The result was that 
a number of academies were closed, and books were subjected 
to a rigorous censorship (an Index librorum prohihitorum was 
prepared). Hence we can readily understand how books like 
the treatise Concerning the Benefit of Christ were destroyed, 
with the exception of a few copies. 

In conclusion, let us glance at the Greek Church. 

The Greek Church was in its development behind the 
Eomish Church. In the earlier centuries it had indeed de- 
parted in many respects from the apostolic foundation, but 
it had also avoided various abuses of the Eomish Church. It 
recognised neither the celibacy of priests (of the lower orders, 

» Vol. ii. pp. 340 and 632 [German], * See KircJienfjesch. i. p. 60, 


at all events), iior the exclusion of the laity from the cup in 
the Lord's Supper, nor the doctrine of purgatory. In regard 
also to ceremonies and the worship of images, it had at least 
observed some moderation, and it M^as also more moderate 
than the Eomish Church in the reverence which it paid to 
saints. The mere fact that the Greeks were regarded as 
schismatics by the Romish Church, tended to bring them, like 
the Hussites and Waldenses, near to the Protestants. In 
addition to this, their language was that of the New Testa- 
ment and of the Greek fathers of the Church, for whom the 
Reformers manifested so strong a predilection. The culture 
of this tongue, neglected by the Romanists, must necessarily 
awaken Humanistic sympathies. True, the doctrinal S3'stem of 
the Greek Church inclined to Pelagianism. Its views of sin 
and grace were pre-Augustinian, while the dogmas of the 
Reformation were deeply imbued with the tenets of Augustine. 
But might not an agreement be arrived at concerning these 
differences ? We can well understand the desire of the ad- 
herents of the Reformation to seek an alliance with the Greek 
Church. There were young Greeks studying at Wittenbei'g 
as well as elsewhere in Germany, and through one such 
student, the Greek deacon Demetrius Mysus, Melanchthon 
in 1559 sent a Greek translation of the Augsburg Confession 
to Joasaph II., patriarch of Constantinople. The catechisms 
of Luther were likewise translated into Greek. The requisite 
conditions for an actual agreement were, however, lacking. 
On a subsequent occasion, further negotiations were set on 
foot between the Reformed and Greek Churches, but were in 
their turn broken off. We shall return to a consideration of 
these topics at some future time. For the present we must 
take leave of the age of the Reformation, with its many 
agitations and conflicts ; with its mysteries, which have never 
yet been fully and completely fathomed, but are continually 
tempting to fresh investigations and revealing new outlooks. 



Adrian vi. , his reformatory views, i. 

189 ; his letter to the Diet of Nurem- 
berg : its unfavourable reception, 

190 ; his death, 191. 

Aebli, Landamman of Glarus, mediates 
between Zurich and the Romanist 
Cantons, ii. 92. 

Agricola, Reformer at Augsburg, at 
Marburg Conference, ii. 104 ; at 
Diet of Augsburg, 110 ; employed by 
Charles v. to draw up Augsburg In- 
terim, 278. 

Alba, Duke of, commands for Charles v. 
in the Sclimalkaldic War, ii. 269 ; 
wins battle of Miihlberg, 270 ; his 
share in Philip of Hesse's captivity, 
274 ; advises Charles to exhume 
Luther's body, 275 ; his inquisitorial 
supervision of Philip of Hesse's im- 
prisonment, 291. 

Alba, Duchess of, her admiration of 
St. Theresa, ii. 414. 

Albert, Archbishop of Mentz, engaged 
in sale of indulgences, i. 94 ; ap- 
pealed to by Luther, 99 ; corresponds 
with him, 167, 168 ; joins Holy 
Alliance, ii. 2-34 ; tolerates Protes- 
tantism, 237 ; his reception of Augs- 
burg Interim, 279; afterwards opposes 
it, 282. 

Albert of Brandenburg favours the Re- 
formation, i. 217 ; supports Maurice 
of Saxony, ii. 294 ; quarrels with 
him, 297. 

Albert of Prussia embraces the Refor- 
mation and secularizes his domi- 
nions, ii. 9 ; favours the Reformer 
Lismann, 357. 

Aleander at Diet of "Worms as Papal 
Legate, i. 135 ; excommunicates 
Luther, 139 ; protests against Peace 
of Nuremberg, ii. 162. 

Ameaux, his hostility to Calvin, and its 
causes, ii. 331. 

Amerbach, his friendship with Eras- 
mus, ii. 80 ; professor at Basel, 82. 

Am-Grlit, town-clerk of Zurich, his 


Eucharistic controversy with Zwin- 
gle, i. 311. 

Amsdorf accompanies Lutherto Worms, 
i. 132 ; separated from him, 138 ; 
accommodates Luther on his visit to 
Wittenberg, 169 ; preaclies at Mag- 
deburg, 219 ; his connection with 
Katharine von Bora, 401 ; his cha- 
racter, 421 ; his labours at Leipsic, 
ii. 237 ; made Bishop of Naumburg, 
245 ; publishes the Papal bull, 268. 

Anabaptists, review of their tenets, ii. 
26-28 ; their excesses, 29-32 ; dis- 
putes with them at Zurich, 33, 34 ; 
their sufferings, 34; 35 ; severity of 
their treatment in vSvvitzerland, 39 ; 
condemned in Augsburg Confession, 
119, 120 ; and by Basel Confession, 
185 ; their excesses at Miinster, 217. 

Anderson, Chancellor of Sweden, fa- 
vours the Reformation, i. 220, 221. 

Anhalt, Wolfgang, Prince of, signs 
Speier Protest, ii. 21 ; and Augsburg 
Confession, 117 ; at Diet of Schmal- 
kalden, 156. 

Anna, St., imposture of, at Bern, i. 

Anshelm, persecution of himself and 
his wife, i. 327, 328. 

Apocalypse rejected by Luther, i. 159. 

Arcimboldi, his industry in sale of 
indulgences, i. 94 ; opposed by Elia, 

Augsburg; Diet of, a critical epoch, i. 
24, ii. 132 ; importance of the city, 
i. 31 ; Luther summoned thither, 
105 ; Diet convoked, ii. 109 ; Pro- 
testant Confession of, 118,119; Recess 
of the Diet, 130, 131 ; the Reforma- 
tion there, 210 ; " Armed Diet" of, 
277 ; Interim drawn up there, 279 ; 
Fourth Diet of, small attendance at 
it, 288 ; another Diet there, 298 ; 
Religious Peace concluded there, 
299, 300 ; its results, 300. 

Augustinian monks, their reformatory 
tendencies, i. 171, 195. 

2 D 



Augustus, Duke of Saxony, succeeds 
liis brother Jlaurice, and concludes 
Treaty of Nauiulnug, ii. 298. 

Austria, its rivahy witli France, i. 26; 
its influence on iSwies ^Kilitics, ii. 73. 

Badex, disputation at, ii. 41, 42 ; its 
results, 48 ; state 'Of the liefornia- 
tion there, 210, 

Marietta, specimen 'of his preaching, i. 

Barnim of Pomerania, reotor of Wit- 
tenberg, at Leipsic Dis])utation, i. 
116 ; his interest in it, 119 ; his Re- 
formation tendencies, ii. 211 ; joins 
Schnialkaldic League, 224. 

IJasel, sketch of the city, i. 266, 267 ; 
influence of its University on the 
Eeformation, 268 ; disputation there, 
331-333; insurrection there, 395- 
398; further dis'turbancesthere, ii. 53: 
final victory of the Keformation, 66- 
79 ; changes in the University, 81 ; 
constitutional and n>oral reforms, 

Basel, Little, its hostility to the Refor- 
mation, ii. 71, 77, 79. 

]jassi founds the Order of the Capu- 
chins, ii. 399, 400. 

Baudichon attacked by Genevan mob, 
ii. 300; protects Froment, 201 ; flees 
to liern, sent back from Bern to 
Oeneva, 202. 

Ijcccaria preaches Reformed doctrines 
in Locaraio, consequently banished 
thence, ii. 360. 

Beer presides at Baden Disputation, ii. 
44, 45 ; flees from Basel, 74, 79. 

Bern, progress of Reformation tliere, 
i. 263-265, and 326-329 ; its neu- 
trality, 310; reaction there aftei' 
Baden Disputation, ii. 48, 49 ; Dis- 
putation there, 54-58 ; its results 
favourable to the Reformation, 58 ; 
unwillingness of tlie city to war, 91 ; 
joy there at Peace of Steinhausen, 
94 ; forces Refoi'mation on Aigle, 
187 ; protects Farel, 192, 193, 
etc. ; interferes in Genevan Refor- 
mation, 201 ; Eucharistic Synod 
there, 351. 

Berquin, French Protestant, his mar- 
tyrdom, ii. 154. 

Berthelier, leader of Genevan Lilier- 
tines, ii. 341 ; obliged to leave 
Geneva, 342. 

Beza, his persecuting tendencies, i. 
175 ; his conduct to Bolsec, ii. 333 ; 
his account of Servetus, 335 ; his de- 
fence of punishment of heretics, 339 ; 
rector of Geneva Academy, 342 ; 
gives (.'alvin while dying the Lord's 

Supper, 343 ; his account of Calvin's 
death, 344 ; and of his personal ap- 
pearance, 345. 

Bible, i)overty of medieval study of, i. 
10, 29G ; Luther's translation of, 

Bibliander, jirofessor at Basel, ii. 181 ; 
at Eucharistic Conference of Aarau, 

Blansch, Reformer at Tubingen, at 
Zurich Conference, i. 295. 

Blarer, Ambrose, Swabian Reformer, i. 
200 ; at Bern Disputation, ii. 55 ; 
his early life, 60 ; at Constance, 61 ; 
at Tliurgau, 64 ; engaged in Wur- 
temberg Reformation, 208, 209 ; 
agrees to compromise Eucharistic 
controversy, 209. 

Blarer, Margaret, leading deaconess at 
Constance, ii. 379. 

Blaurock, Swiss Anabaptist, ii. 24 ; his 
persecution and death, 35. 

Bodenstein. See Karlstadt. 

Bohemia, followers of Huss in, i. 42 ; 
their tenets partly supported by 
Luther, 119. 

Bolsec disputes Calvin's doctrine of 
election, ii. 333 ; he is banished : his 
libellous tractate on Calvin, 334 ; 
reviviil of his adherents after Ser- 
vetus' execution, 339. 

Boniface viii. founds system of indul- 
gences, i. 93. 

Bonivard, Reformer at Geneva, ii. 195 ; 
his reforms rather social than moral: 
his capricious character, 196. 

Bora, Katharine von, escapes from 
Minptschen nunnery : Luther's care 
for her welfare, i. 400; he marries her, 
401 ; her married life, 401, 402 ; 
comforts her husband in a severe 
sickness, 405 ; her anxiety in his 
absence, ii. 254 ; privations of her 
later life : her death, 257. 

Botanus visits Basel churches for Qico- 
lampadius, ii. 68 ; his death in battle, 
167 ; succeeded by Oswald Myconius, 

Bourbon, the Constable, his sack of 
Rome, ii. 15. 

Boyheim, his attitude to the Reforma- 
tion at Constance, ii. 63. 

Brandenburg, George, ^Margrave of, ii. 
9 ; .signs Protest of Speier, 21 ; at 
Diet of Augsburg, 114; signs Me- 
lanchthon's Confes.sion, 116. 

Ijrandenburg, House of, its attitude to 
the Reformation, ii. 8, 9. 

Brenz, chief Swabian Reformer, i. 198; 
his Lutheran views of the Eucharist, 
309 ; liis SynDramma : its vague- 
ness, 3C9. 370 ; his views on the Pea- 



sant War, 385 ; at Marburg, ii. 104; 
at Diet of Augsburg, 124 ; recom- 
mended to Ulrich of Wurtemberg, 
208 ; assists Schuepf at Stuttgart, 
210 ; at Worms Conference, 241 ; 
rejects Augsburg Interim, 2S0 ; his 
persecution and flight to Basel, 281 ; 
reproaches Melanchthon with cowar- 
dice, 284 ; opposes Schwenkfeldt, 

Brethren of the Common Life, i. 18, 
19, note; tlieir educational influence, 

Briconnet, Bishop of Meaux, protects 
Faber, i. 226, 227. 

Briefer presides at Disputation of Bern : 
his caution, ii. 57. 

Brismann, Reformer in Lusatia and 
Konigsberg, i. 216. 

Brodtlein, Swiss Anabaptist, ii. 24, 25. 

Bucer dissuades Luther from going to 
"Worms, i. 133 ; joins Zell at Strass- 
burg, 201 ; marries QJcolampadius' 
widow, 403 ; at Bern Disputation, 
ii. 55 ; goes to Marburg, 103 ; visits 
Luther at Coburg, 111 ; draws up 
Tetrapolitana, 125; gains its sup- 
porters admission to the Schmalkal- 
dic League, 159 ; friend of Farel, 
186 ; his early life, 225 ; attempts 
to compromise Eucharistic contro- 
versy, 226 ; attends conferences on 
the subject, 229 ; at Worms Con- 
ference, 241 ; induces Calvin to 
come to Strassburg, 318 ; and to 
return to Geneva, 321 ; goes to 
England, 363. 

Bugenhagen, at Hamburg, i. 211 ; 
sketch of his life, 213 ; teaches at 
Wittenberg, 214; his views on the 
Eucharist, 370 ; present at Luther's 
marriage, 401 ; his family life, 421 ; 
at Marburg, ii. 104 ; advi-ses John 
Frederick against a Coirncil, 206 ; 
visits Pomerania, 211 ; assists 
in Brunswick Reformation, 248 ; 
preaches Luther's funeral sermon, 
256 ; his conduct in siege of AVitten- 
berg, 271 ; acknowledges the rule of 
Maurice, 275 ; assists to prepare 
Leipsic Interim, 283. 

BuUinger opposes Samson's traffic in 
Switzerland, i. 253 ; his marriage, 
ii. 176, note; embraces the Reforma- 
tion, 179 ; flees to Zurich, 180. 

BuUinger, son of the above, his account 
of Bern Disputation, ii. 55 ; succeeds 
Zwingle at Zurich, 176 ; his early 
life, 177 ; friend of Zwingle, 178 ; 
his views on the Eucharist, 179 ; his 
work at Bremgarten and flight to 
Zurich, ISO ; made rector of Zurich 

Cathedral, 181; summoned before the 
Council, 183 ; at Basel Conference, 
229 ; congratulates Philip of Hesse 
on his release, 296 ; his views ou 
Servetus' case, 337 ; his grief on 
Calvin's death, 344 ; his agreement 
with Calvin on the Eucharist, 351 ; 
receives Calvin and Farel at Zurich, 
352 ; his interest in the Locarnese 
Reformation, 350 ; and hospitable 
reception of its exiles, 361 ; opposes 
Schwenkfeldt, 387 ; his connection 
with Thamer, 391. 
Busch, Hermann, a Humanist, i. 55 ; 
teaches Bugenhagen, 213. 

Cajetan, his character : sent to Augs- 
burg : his wrath against Luther, i. 

Calvin, centre of Latin Reformation, 
226 ; his views on the Eucharist, 
375 ; his Old Testament spirit, ii. 
139 ; meets Melanchthon at Worms 
Conference, 241 ; displeased with 
Melanchthon's temporizing, 284 ; his 
position in the Reformation, 301 ; 
his family, 302 ; his early life and 
education, 303 ; his legal studies, 
304 ; embraces Evangelical doctrines 
and flees to Navarre, 304, 305 ; his 
retired life : he writes his Institutes, 
306 ; review of the Institutes, 307 ; 
his doctrines of Election, 309 ; of the 
Church, 310; of the Sacraments, 311; 
unique character of this work, 311 ; 
his sojourn in Italy, return to France, 
and arrival at Geneva, 312 ; his 
work therewith Farel, 313 ; severity 
of his regulations : at Lausanne Dis- 
putation, 314 ; his dispute with 
Caroli, 315 ; and with the Genevan 
Government, 316 ; refuses to cele- 
brate the communion and is banished, 

317 ; goes to Strassburg: his con- 
nection with the German Reformers, 

318 ; his marriage and family : his 
cosmopolitan character, 319 ; his 
writings at Strassburg : his answer to 
Cardinal Sadolet, 320 ; hesitates to 
return to Geneva, 321 ; his return, 
322 ; his position there, 323 ; his 
theocratic ideas, 324 ; his ecclesias- 
tical discipline and Catechism, 325 ; 
tends to persecution, 327 ; his con- 
troversy with Castellio, 328 ; his 
speech on Castellio's exile, 329 ; his 
conflict with the Libertines, 330 ; 
difficulties of his position: his dis- 
pute with Ameaux, 331 ; his life 
threatened by Perrin and Gruet, 
332 ; his controversy with Bolsec, 
333, 334 ; his early connection with 



Servetus : procures his arrest, 335 ; 
Lis conduct in this case, 336, 337 ; 
presses for his death, 337 ; vindicates 
his conduct, 339 ; his conduct blame- 
worthy, hut much exaggerated, 340 ; 
refuses to admit Berthelier to com- 
munion, 341 ; his share in founding 
the Geneva Academy : his bodily 
debility, 342 ; his last days, 343 ; 
liis death and burial, 344 ; his per- 
sonal appearance : comparison of him 
with Luther and Zwingle, 345 ; 
oecumenical character of his work, 
346 ; his unattractiveness, 347 ; his 
conduct in controversy, 347, 348 ; 
strength of his sympathies, 348, 349 ; 
his want of poetry and humour, 349 ; 
his excellencies and Luther's comple- 
mentary, 350 ; universality of his 
Reformation, 350, 351 ; at Euchar- 
istic Synod of Bern, 351 j visits 
Bullinger at Zurich with Farel : 
approves Zurich Consensus, 352 ; his 
interest in the Locarnese Chiu'ch, 
360 ; tries to improve the cloth 
manufacture, 380 ; his views of 
amusement more strict than Luther's, 

Camerarius,biographerof Melanchthon, 
i. 72, 112, note ; preaches Reformed 
doctrines, 170 ; his last interview 
with Melanchthon, ii. 353. 

Canierino, IJuchess of, favours the 
Capuchins, ii. 400. 

Campeggi, legate of Clement vii. to 
Diet of Nuremberg, i. 191 ; unites 
Roman Catholic states at Ratisbon, 
192 ; at Conference of Worms, ii. 

Campeggio, Papal legate at Diet of 
Augsburg, ii. 114 ; tries to silence 
MoUio, 358. 

Capito remonstrates with Luther for 
his boldness, i. 168 ; joins Zell at 
Strassburg, 201 ; receives French 
refugees there, 227 ; adopts Zwingle's 
style of preaching, 241 ; his work at 
Basel, 269 ; friend of CEcolampadius, 
276 ; marries his widow, 403 ; at 
Bern Disjmtation, ii. 57 ; dis- 
approves Luther's violence, 97 ; 
friend of Farel, 186 ; at Aarau Con- 
ference, 230 ; and at Worms Con- 
ference, 241. 

Capuchins, Order of, their foundation, 
ii. 399 ; their constitution and 
character, 400 ; their affiliated Order 
of nuns, 401. 

CaralTa, Cardinal, his early connection 
with the Theatines, ii. 402 ; induces 
Raul III. to reorganize the Inquisi- 
lion, 415. 

Caroli, at Lausanne Dis])utation, Re- 
formed pastor there, ii. 314 ; his 
dispute with Calvin and I'eturn to 
Romanism, 315. 

Castellio, sketch of his life, ii. 327 ; his 
Humanist tendencies and doctrinal 
dispute with Calvin, 328 ; leaves 
Geneva, 329 ; probable author of the 
Martin Bellius anti-Calvin pamphlet, 

Catholic Apostolic opposed to Evan- 
gelical Church, i. 1 ; its struggles 
with the Empire, 8, 9 ; with France, 
10 ; easily condones moral oftences, 
18 ; disintegration of, 35 ; popular 
contempt for its ordinances, 36-39 ; 
retains germs of truth, 43 ; necessity 
for its internal reform, ii. 395. 

Cellarius, one of the "Zwickau pro- 
phets," i. 173. 

Ceporinus assists Zwingle at Zurich, i. 

Charlemagne protects the Church, i. 8 ; 
advocates preaching in vernacular, 18. 

Charles v. , Emperor, his accession, i. 26 ; 
performance of dumb comedy before 
him, 77 ; desires Luther's presence at 
AVorms, 131 ; at the Diet, 135 ; dis- 
approves edict of Nuremberg, 191 ; 
tries to check Frankfort Reforma- 
tion, 202 ; his victory at Pavia and 
consecjuent German policy, ii. 2-4 ; 
summons Diet of Augsburg, 109 ; his 
interviews with John of Sa.xony 
before its opening, 112 ; his entry 
into Augsburg, 113 ; silences preach- 
ing there, 115 ; his displeasure with 
the Protestants, 125 ; tries to break 
up Schmalkaldic League, 159 ; con- 
cludes Peace of Nuremberg, 161 ; 
desires to summon General Council, 
206 ; joins Holy Alliance, 234 ; at 
Diet of Regensburg, 242 ; revives 
Peace of Nuremberg, 244 ; concludes 
Peace of Crespy, 249 ; declares war 
on the League, 267 ; at Miihlberg 
and AVittenberg, 270 ; his modera- 
tion there, 275 ; refuses to acknow- 
ledge Trent Council, 276 ; desires 
tokranee, 277 ; disapjiroves the 
summons to Council of Trent, 288 ; 
refuses to believe in Maurice of 
Saxony's hostility, 290 ; is defeated 
by him, 295 ; his abdication and 
death, 300 ; his opinion of Mollio's 
preaching, 359. 

Charles, Duke of Savoy, tries in vain 
to make Geneva renounce the Refor- 
tion, ii. 204, 205. 

Christian ii. of Denmark, crowned 
King of Sweden, i. 220 ; indecision 
of his ecclesiastical position, 221. 



Christian iii. of Denmark joins the 
Schnialkaldic League, ii. 235. 

Christianity, its establishment, exten- 
sion, and corruption, i. 6, 12 ; 
truths of, only defined by conflict, 7. 
Clarenbach, his earl_Y life, ii. 150 ; his 
arrest and martyrdom, 152. 

Clement vii., his papal policy, i. 191 ; 
his death, ii. 223 ; ajipoints an In- 
quisitor for Spain, 361 ; authorizes 
Capuchin Order, 400 ; and Pauline 
Order, 401 ; and Theatine Order, 

Clopris, an Augustinian monk, ii. 151 ; 
his Lutheran tendencies and con- 
sequent arrest, 152. 

Cochlpeus attacks Luther's translation 
of the Bible, i. 149 ; confutes 
Augsburg Confession, ii. 123 ; at 
Hagenau Conference, 240 ; and at 
"Worms, 241. 

Cologne, Chapter of, its part in the 
Reuchlinian controversy, i. 53, 

Comander, Reformer in the Orisons, ii. 
39 ; at Disputation of Ilanz, 40. 

Confessions of Augsburg, ii. 118, 119 ; 
Tetrapolitan, 125, 126 ; Zwinglian, 
126-129; their importance, 132-136 ; 
review of their circumstances, 135 ; 
and doctrines, 140-150 ; Danish 
Confession of Copenhagen, 155 ; and 
of Basel, 184, 185 ; Second of Basel, 
or First Helvetic, 230 ; Schnialkaldic 
Articles, 234. 

Constance, Reformation there, ii. 61 ; 
its league with Zurich, 63. 

Contarini, Papal nuncio at Regensburg, 
his attitude there, ii. 242, and note. 

Copernicus adheres to Romanism, ii. 

Copus, rector of Paris University, 
becomes unpopular through Calvin's 
speech for him, ii. 305. 

Corderius, tutor of Calvin, ii. 303. 

Cordus, Enricius, supports Reuchlin, i. 
65 ; preaches Reformed doctrines, 
170 ; welcomes Reformers to Magde- 
burg, ii. 104. 

Corvinus, Antony, preacher to Philip 
of Hesse, ii. 221 ; helps to establish 
the Reformation in Brunswick, 246. 

Courault, Reformed preacher at Geneva, 
ii. 315 ; his passionate conduct in 
the pulpit, 316 ; is imprisoned and 
banished, 317 ; goes as pastor to 
Orbe, 318. 

Cranmer, his work in England, ii. 363 ; 
his persecution and martyrdom, 364. 

Crescentio, Cardinal, favourite of Pope 
Julius III., ii. 288 ; presides in 
Council of Trent, 399. 

Cruciger, Caspar, labours at Leipsic, 

ii. 237 ; his connection with Luther's 
writings, 259. 

Devay, leading Hungarian Reformer, 
ii. 356, 357. 

Didymus, lecturer at Buchholz, i. 171 ; 
supports Karlstadt's views, 172. 

Diets of Augsburg, i. 105 ; of Worms, 
135 ; of Nuremberg, 190 ; its issue 
favourable to the Reformation, 191 ; 
compared with that of Worms, 192, 
193 ; of Speier, ii. 4 ; Second Diet 
there, 20 ; Second Diet of Augsburg, 
109 ; of Regensburg, 241 ; further 
Diets at Augsburg — see Augsburg. 

Dominican monks, their dispute with 
Reuchlin, i. 50-54 ; anti-Reform 
tendencies of, 195 ; their dispute 
with the Franciscans at Bern, 258 ; 
organize imposture of St. Anna 
there, 262. 

Dorfmann, Swiss Reformer in the 
Orisons, i. 342. 

Draco, Reformer at Miltenberg, 209. 

Dumb comedy performed before Em- 
peror Charles v., i. 77 ; its repre- 
sentative character, 78. 

Dumoulin accompanies Froment to 
Geneva, ii. 201 ; is banished thence : 
his martyrdom at Lyons, 202. 

Dusentschuer, Anabaptist pseudo- 
prophet at Miinster, ii. 219. 

Ebek preaches Melanchthon's funeral 
sermon, ii. 354 ; his poetical talents, 

Eberlin, Reformed preacher, friend of 
Hutten, Sickingen, and Melanch- 
thon, i. 196 ; his "Fifteen Allies," 

Eck joins in Indulgence controversy, 
i. 102 ; his previous history, 103, 
note ; publicly disputes with Luther 
and Melanchthon at Leipsic, 116 
et seq. ; described by Mosellanus, 
121, 122 ; procures a bull condemn- 
ing Luther, 127 ; opposes Reforma- 
tion in Bavaria, 206 ; his treatment 
of the Baroness von Grumbach, 207 ; 
satirized in popular ballads, 229 ; 
challenges Zwingle to a disputation, 
ii. 41 ; his thesis at Baden Disputa- 
tion, 42 ; his conduct there, 45 ; 
confutes Augsburg Confession, 123 ; 
attacks Zwingle, 130 ; at Conference 
of Hagenau, 240 ; and of Worms, 

Edward vi. of England, his reign 
favourable to the Reformation, ii. 
363 ; his death, 364. 

Egidius, early Spanish Protestant, his 
imprisonment, ii. 361, 362. 



Elia, Danish Reformer, opposes Arcim- 
bokli's sale of iiululgences, i. 221. 

Emdeii, progress of Reformation at, i. 

Emser, liis writings burned by liUther, 
i. 129 ; attacks Luther's translation 
of the Bible, 149; abusively attacked 
by Luther, 169, note. 

England, Reformation in, i. 27 ; its 
doctrinal peculiarities, ii. 362, 363 ; 
opposed by Queen Mary, 364. 

Ennius, Papal legate at Zurich, ii. 182 ; 
stirs up the Catholic cantons against 
Zurich, 183. 

Ensiedeln, its legend, i. 237. 

Era.snius, elegance of his Latin, i. 33 ; 
his superstition, 40, note ; jiarallel 
between him and Hutten, 61 ; his 
early life, 62 ; his residence in the 
monastery and its results, 63 ; his 
reputation, 64 ; his personal appear- 
ance, 64, 65 ; his want of principle, 
66 ; and of enthusiasm, 67 ; his 
beneficial influence on the Reforma- 
tion : his Praise of Folly, 68 ; his 
residence at Basel and delight in 
its society, 69, 70 ; his desire for 
popular education, 70, 71; hispopu- 
laritj', 72 ; praises Wimpheling, 76 ; 
contrasted with Luther, 84, 87, 278, 
289 ; differs from Luther on justifi- 
cation, 91 ; his favourable opinion of 
Melanchthon, 114 ; Kessler's account 
of him at Basel, 181 ; friend of 
Zwingle, 235, 289, 356 ; his attitude 
to Basel Reformation, 268 ; and 
relations with Luther, 281, 282, 
284 ; contrasted with Hutten, 285 ; 
his treatment of him, 287 ; differs 
from Luther on free-will, 289 ; his 
hesitation in theology, 290 ; his 
position in the Eucharistic contro- 
versy, 368 ; opposes the Reformers' 
marriages, 402 ; refuses to be present 
at Baden Disputation, ii. 44 ; his 
ideas of a compromise, 50 ; leaves 
Basel, 79 ; dies, 80. 

Eric, Duke of Brunswick, his attention 
to Luther, i. 137. 

Ernest, Duke of Liineburg, signs 
Speier Protest, ii. 21 ; and Augsburg 
Confession, 116 ; corresponds with 
Luther, 227. 

Esch, his martyrdom, i. 223, 224. 

Esslingen, energy of the Reformation 
there, i. 196, 199 ; letter sent thither 
Ijy Luther, 199 ; Reformed doctrine 
rendered compulsory there, 200. 

Eucharistic controversy at Zurich, 
i. 301 303, 311, 312 ; its rise, 350- 
353 ; its points of agreement and 
controversy between J<utherans and 

Zwinglians, 358, 359 ; originates 
with Luther and Karlstadt, 361 ; 
respective positions assumed in it 
by Luther, 359, 369 ; Zwingle, 364, 
365 ; (Ecolampadius, 365-367 ; the 
Council of Basel, 362, 367 ; and 
Erasmus, 368 ; its unedifying nature, 
373 ; its importance, 373-378 ; its 
final settlement neither IjUtherau 
nor Zwinglian, 376, 377 ; projected 
disputation on, ii. 22 ; progress of, 
between Lutherand Zwingle, 96-103; 
disputation on, takes place at Mar- 
burg, 103 — see ilarburg ; Lambert's 
views on, 107, 108 ; its place in the 
Augsburg Confession, 117 ; and in 
the Tetrapolitana, 126 ; only point 
of divergence between Luther and 
Zwingle, 140; Zwingle's final views 
on, 170, 171 ; views of liullinger on, 
179; "Concord" of Stuttgart on, 
between Blarer and Schnepli', 209 ; 
attempts to get some compromise 
generally accepted, 224 ; conferences 
with this object, 229 ; agreement of 
Bullinger and Calvin on it, 351 ; 
re-opened after Consensus of Zurich, 
352 ; Schwenkfeldt's views on, 386. 

Faber, leading French Humanist, 
i. 226 ; translates the Bible : flees 
to Strassburg, 227. 

Faber, John, vicar-general of Con- 
stance, opposes Samson's traffic, 
i. 253, 254 ; and Zwingle's doc- 
trines, 256 ; at Conference of Zurich, 
293 ; disapproves it, but takes part, 
295 ; at Diet of Speier, ii. 20 ; 
opposes Zwingle, 41 ; confutes Augs- 
burg Confession, 123. 

Fabricius sent to Miinster to oppose 
the Anabaptists, ii. 217. 

Farel, i. 227 ; his early career, 330 ; 
his disputation at Basel, 331-333 ; 
his marriage, 402, note ; corresponds 
with (Ecolampadius, 403 ; his bad 
o{)inion of Erasmus, ii. 80, note ; 
first Reformer of Romanic Switzer- 
land, 186 ; difficulties of his position, 
187 ; his itinerant preaching, 187, 
ISS ; its power, 188, 189 ; his im- 
prudence at Vaiangin, 189 ; and its 
consequences, 190, 191 ; rage excited 
by his preaching, 192, 193 ; arrives 
at Geneva, 196 ; his work there, 

197 ; expelled by the priests, 197, 

198 ; sent back by Ijcrn Govern- 
ment, 202 ; installed in a church at 
Geneva: celebrates the Lord's Supper, 
203 ; procures the abolition of the 
Romish rites, 204 ; contrasted with 
Zwingle and Qicolampadius, 205 ; 



procures Calvin's stay at Geneva, 
313 ; at Lausanne Disputation, 314 ; 
refuses to celebrate the communion : 
is banished, 317 ; goes to jSTeuchatel, 
318 ; induces Calvin's return to 
Geneva, 321 ; at Servetus' execution, 
338 ; at Calvin's death-bed, 344 ; 
visits Bullinger at Zurich with 
Calvin, 352 ; his interest in the 
Church of Locarno, 3G0. 
Ferdinand, Archduke, at Diet of 
Worms, i. 135 ; acts for Charles v., 
191 ; at Diet of Speier, ii. 4 ; be- 
comes King of Hungary, 16 ; at 
Diet of Augsburg, 114 ; becomes 
Eoman King or Empeior-elect, 156 ; 
receives Duchy of Wurtemberg, 207 ; 
resigns it to Dnke Ulrich by Peace 
of Cadan, 208 ; joins Holy Alliance, 
234 ; opens third Diet of Worms, 
250 ; concludes Treaty of Passau, 
295 ; opens Diet of Augsburg, 298. 
Flacius, his attacks on JMelanchthon's 
moderation, ii. 285 ; Melanchthon's 
reception of them, 286. 
riysted, his life and martyrdom, ii. 154. 
Fontaines, Nicholas de, institutes pro- 
secution of Servetus, ii. 335. 
Fortmiiller, his labours as Swiss Re- 
former, ii. 60 ; at Dissenliofen, 63. 
Fossambrone, his share in foundation 

of the Capuchin Order, ii. 400. 
France, its strength as rival of Austria, 
i. 26 ; its Italian policy, 27 ; pro- 
gress of Reformation in, ii. 356. 
Francis I., King of France, i. 27 ; his 
Swiss alliance, 33, 246 ; protects 
Faber, 227 ; defeated at Pavia, ii. 2; 
forms alliance against Charles v., 
15 ; approves Schmalkaldic League, 
159 ; abandons it, 235 ; concludes 
Peace of Crespy with Charles v., 
249 ; annoyed at the Calvin-Copus 
discourse, 305 ; Calvin's Institutes 
dedicated to him, 307. 
Franciscan monks, reformatory ten- 
dencies of, i. 195 ; their controversy 
at Bern with the Dominicans con- 
cerning the Virgin Mary, 258 ; 
Capuchins an offshoot from, ii. 399. 
Franck, forerunner of modern meta- 
physicians, ii. 387 ; his pantheistic 
views, 388 ; his views of the Scrip- 
tures : his erratic life, 389. 
Frankfort-on-Main, progress of Refor- 
mation at, i. 202, ii. 210, 211 ; truce 
between Schmalkaldic League and 
Holy Alliance concluded there, 235 ; 
Protestant Diet held there, 250. 
Frecht persecuted for opposing Augs- 
burg Interim, ii. 282 ; quarrels with 
Schwenkfeldt, 386, 

Frederick i.. King of Denmark, pro- 
cures toleration of Lutherans, ii. 155 ; 
favours the Reformation, 221, 222. 

Frederick, Elector - Palatine, opens 
Diet of Augsburg, ii. 116 ; com- 
municates the emperor's decision to 
the Protestants, 125 ; negotiates for 
the emperor with the Schmalkaldic 
League, 160 ; has Bucer for chap- 
lain, 226 ; at peace meeting of 
Frankfort, 235 ; presides at Diet of 
Regensburg, 242 ; procures tolerant 
Recess of Speier, 248 ; accepts Augs- 
burg Interim, 280. 

Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, 
protects Luther, i. 30 ; founds Wit- 
tenberg University, 85 ; mediates 
on Luther's behalf at Rome, 104 ; 
his indecision in supporting Luther, 
106, 107; regent of the empire, 30, 
107 ; receives Luther at Worms, 134; 
approves his attitude there, 138 ; en- 
courages Reformed preaching, 171 ; 
his hostility to the Zwickau " pro- 
phets," 1 75 ; desires Luther to remain 
at the Wartburg, 176 ; will not be 
responsible for him, 178 ; interview 
between him and Erasnnis, 283 ; his 
charitable view of the Peasant War, 
387 and note, and ii. 2 ; his death, 
1 ; and character, 2. 

Frederick, Duke of Schleswig, protects 
Reformation there, i. 210. 

Freiburg, its opposition to Zvvingle, i. 
310, 337. 

Froment begins to preach at Geneva, 
ii. 198 ; leaves the city, 199 ; returns, 
is ill received, 201 ; flees to Bern, 

Frosch, Reformed preacher at Augs- 
burg, i. 205. 

Frundsberg, encourages Luther at 
Worms, i. 135 ; at sack of Rome, 
ii. 15. 

Furbity, Romanist preacher at Geneva, 
ii. 201 ; opposes the Reformers at 
Genevan Disputation : forced to re- 
cant, 202 ; is impi'isoned, 203. 

Gaetano of Thienne, founder of the 
Theatine Order, ii. 402. 

Geiler, zeal and coarseness of his preach- 
ing, i. 39 ; his influence on Wim- 
pheling, 74 ; and on Strassburg Re- 
formation, 201. 

Geneva, its important position, ii. 194 ; 
and political parties, 195 ; arrival of 
Farel there, 196 ; the city persecutes 
both him and Froment, 197-199 ; 
gathering of Protestants there, 199 ; 
great religious tumults there, 200 ; dis- 
putation there, 202 ; concedes tolera- 



tion on demand of Bern : renounces 
allegiance to its bishop, 203 ; its 
Uetbnnation finally established, 204 ; 
refuses the solicitations of the Duke 
of Savoy, 205 ; its tendency to snmp- 
tuaiy laws, 313 ; increased by Calvin, 
314 ; its quarrel with Calvin, 316 ; 
it ajipeals to him to answer Cardinal 
Sadolet, 320 ; and recalls him, 321 ; 
its theocracy, 324 ; its ecclesiastical 
arrangements, 325, 326 ; its vener- 
able company and consistory, 326 ; 
Iteforrned disci]iline finally estab- 
lished, 327 ; affair of Berthelier, 
341 ; academy founded there, 342 ; 
its council's generosity to Calvin in 
sickness, 343. 

George, Duke of Anhalt, his attitude 
to the Keformation, i. 119. 

George, Duke of Saxony, at Leipsic 
Disi)utatioii, i. 116 ; hostile to 
JiUther, 119 ; and to the Pope also, 
131 ; blames Luther for Anabaptist 
excesses, 176 ; puts down Peasant 
War, 383 ; dies, ii. 236. 

Gerbel, prominent in Strassburg Ptefor- 
mation, i. 201. 

Germany, its constitution, i. 29, 31 ; 
its disorderly condition, 32 ; cultiva- 
tion of its language, 32, 33 ; its Re- 
formation contrasted with the Swiss, 

Geroldseck, Diebold von, summons 
Zwingle to Ensiedeln, i. 236 ; his 
friendship for Zwingle, 238. 

Gessner, his correct apprehensions of 
natural phenomena, ii. 375. 

Glapio wishes to dispute with Luther, 
i. 133; his controversy with (Ecolam- 
padius, 277. 

Gl ireanus. See Loriti. 

(loudimel sets the Psalms to music, ii. 
376, 377. 

Granvclla disputes with the Reformers 
at Worms Conference, ii. 241; pre- 
sides at Diet of Regensburg, 242 ; 
presses Augsburg Interim on Strass- 
burg, 280 ; his hostility to Brenz, 

Grebel, his fanaticism, i. 298 ; his 
views on the Kucharist, 302, 303; his 
demagogic tendencies, ii. 24 ; his 
excesses, 25 ; flees from Zurich to 
Sehaffhausen, 33; at St. Gall: ex- 
amined by the Council of Zurich, 34. 

Greek Church, its moderation com- 
j)ared with the Romish (!hurch, ii. 
415 ; proposed union of, with the Re- 
formed Cliurches, 416. 

Gregory i. introduces complete litur- 
gical system, i. 12. 

Gregory vii. introduces celibacy, i. 12. 

Gropper, leading Romanist disputant 
at Diet of llegenslnirg, ii. 242 ; op- 
poses Archbishop Hermann's reforms 
at Cologne, 248. 

Gruet, his heterodox views: his execu- 
tion, ii. 332. 

Grumbach, Argula von Staufen, Ba- 
roness of, disputes with Eck, i. 207 ; 
is persecuted, 208. 

Grynaius, professor at Basel, ii. 81 ; 
recommended to Ulrich of Wurtem- 
berg, 208 ; attends Aarau Confer- 
ence and Basel Conference, 229 ; 
receives Brenz at Basel, 281 ; friend 
of Calvin, 306 ; tries to moderate 
liis zeal, 316. 

Gustavus Vasa, King of Sweden, i. 28 ; 
favours the Reformation, 220, ii. 

Guttinara, imperial chancellor, his 
death injurious to the Protestants, 
ii. 112. 

Hagenau, religious conference at, ii. 

Halle, progress of Reformation there, 
ii. 238 ; Luther's interest in it, 238, 

Haller, Berthold, Swiss Reformer at 
Bern, i. 243, 263 ; his perils there, 
326 ; his connection with Lambert, 
ii. 6 ; at Baden Dis[)Utation, 44 ; 
refuses to read mass, 49 ; at Bern 
Disputation, 57 ; goes to Marburg, 
103 ; invited to Solothurn, 173 ; his 
views on Servetus' case, 337. 

Haller, John, Swiss moral reibrmer, i. 

Hamilton, Patrick, Scottish proto-mar- 
tyr, his life and martyrdom, ii. 153. 

Hanseatic League, i. 31 ; its attitude 
to the Reformation, ii. 380. 

Hiitzer, iconoclast at Zurich, i. 297 ; 
preaches Anabaptism in Thurgau, ii. 

Hedio joins Reformers at Strassburg, 
i. 201 ; his opinion of Zwingle, 239 ; 
labours at Basel, 269 ; at Marburg 
Disputation, ii. 103; draws up Tetra- 
politana, 125. 

Heidelberg, conference at, i. 103 ; 
Brenz there, 198. 

Heim, his controversy with ]\Ieyer at 
Bern, i. 329. 

Held, Chancellor, visits Schmalkaldic 
League, ii. 233 ; and Catholic states, 

Henry ii.. King of France, unites with 
Maurice of Saxony against Charles 
v., ii. 290 ; invades Germany ac- 
cordingly, 294 ; hostile to the Re- 
formation, 355. 



Henry A'lii., King of England, his 
controversy with Luther, i. 187 ; 
coarseness of this controversy, 188 ; 
incites Erasmus to attack Luther, 
288 ; his views on the Eucharist, 
359 ; opposes Schmalkahlic League, ii. 
159 ; secedes from riomanism, 362. 

Henry, Duke of Brunswick, opposes 
the Reformation, i. 212 ; aids to sup- 
press Peasant "War, 384 ; attempts a 
compromise at Diet of Speiei-, ii. 21 ; 
joins Holy Alliance, 235 ; expelled 
from his dominions, 246. 

Henry, Duke of Sa.xon}% establishes 
the Eeformation in his dominions, 
ii. 236 ; dies, 237. 

Hermann, Archbishop of Cologne, aids 
to sujjpress Miinster Anabaptists, ii. 
219 ; his liberal tendencies, 221 ; 
holds a council of reform, 247 ; pro- 
cures the assistance of Bucer and 
Melanchthon, 248 ; deposed from 
his office by Charles v., 274. 

Hess, his work as Reformer at Breslau, 
i. 215, 216. 

Hesse, Eoban, supports Reuchlin, i. 
55 ; praises Erasmus, 72 ; receives 
Luther at Erfurt, 132 ; preaches Re- 
formed doctrines there, 170. 

Hildesheim, progress of Reformation 
in, ii. 247. 

Hoflich preaches Reformed doctrines, 
i. 196 ; his persecutions, 197. 

Hofmeister, Swiss Reformer, i. 243 ; 
at Conference of Zurich, 293 ; pre- 
sides at second Conference there, 
298 ; opposes Schmid there, 300 ; 
approves Schmid's closing address, 
304 ; his work at Scliaffhausen, 338 ; 
at Disputation of Ilan^, ii. 40. 

Holy Alliance, formation of, ii. 234 ; 
it concludes Treaty of Frankfort, 

Homburg, Disputation of, ii. 7. 

Honter, leading Reformer in Transyl- 
vania, ii. 357. 

Hoogstraten opposes Reuchlin, i. 53 ; 
burns his Augensjnel, 54 ; sati- 
rized by Hutten, 56 ; opposes 
Luther's theses, 102 ; at trials of 
Voes and others, 223. 

Hottinger, Zurich iconoclast, i. 297 ; 
his excesses, 298 ; his execution, 
306, 307. 

Hubmaier, at second Zurich Confer- 
ence, i. 303 ; labours at St. Gall, 
340 ; his connection with ilunzer, 
ii. 23 ; his excesses, 25 ; sketch of 
his life, 35, 36 ; disputes with Zwingle 
on infant baptism, 37 ; flees from 
Waldshut : his subsequent wander- 
ings, 38 ; his martyrdom, 39. 

Humanists adore'Erasmus, i. 72 ; mingle 
divine and human reverence, 73 ; 
their relation to Luther, 78 ; their 
views of theology, 87 ; finally diverge 
from the Reformation, ii. 370. 

Hungary, progress of Reformation in, 
ii. 356, 357. 

Hutten, his predilection for private 
war, i. 32 ; his literary influence, 33 ; 
friend of Erasmus and Reuchlin, 45 ; 
his poem on the Reuchliniau con- 
troversy, 55, 56 ; contributes to the 
Epistolm ohscuroruni virorum, 56 ; 
his early life, and flight from the 
monastery, 58 ; his satirical genius, 
his Boman Trinity, 59 ; his opinion 
of Winipheling, 75 ; his attitude 
to the Reformation, 123 ; attacks 
the bull published by Eck, 127 ; 
celebrates its burning by Luther, 
130 ; at Basel, 182, 286 ;' interferes 
to protect Ibach at Frankfort, 202 ; 
publishes private letters of Erasmus, 
283 ; his quarrel with Erasmus, 
285-287 ; goes from Basel to Miihl- 
hausen and to Zurich, 287 ; dies 
there, 288. 

Ibach preaches Reformed doctrines at 
Frankfort-on-Main, i. 202, ii. 210. 

llanz. Disputation of, ii. 39-41. 

Indulgences, growth of, i. 93 ; system- 
atic farming of, 94, 95 ; ceremonies 
attending their sale, 95. See under 
Arcimboldi, Samson, Tetzel. 

Inquisition, its work in Spain, ii. 361, 
362 ; reorganization of, by Pope 
Paul III., 415. 

Italy, its political disintegration, i. 
27 ; its literaiy position, 28 ; pro- 
gress of Reformation in, 228, and ii. 

James, Epistle of, rejected by Luther 
as an " epistle of straw," i. 159. 

Jesuits, non-fortuitous origin of the 
Order, ii. 404 ; its formal foundation, 
407 ; its rapid extension, 407, 408 ; 
its important character, 409. 

Jetzer, his imposture at Bern, i. 

Jews, knowledge of Hebrew in Middle 
Ages confined to, i. 48 ; attack on 
them by Pfeff'erkorn, 50. 

Joachim i. of Brandenburg disap- 
proves Peace of Nuremberg, ii. 161 ; 
his zealous adherence to Catholicism, 

Joachim ir. of Brandenburg ofi'ers 
to mediate between Schmalkaldic 
League and Holy Alliance, ii. 235 ; 
promotes the Reformation in his 



ilominions, 237 ; liis firmness in the 
faith, 241 ; negotiates Keeess of 
Speier, 248 ; interceiles for Jolin 
Frederick of Saxony, 273 ; agrees to 
proposed Council, 289. 

John Frederick i., Elector of Saxony, 
son of John the Stedfast, ii. 3 ; sent 
hy his father to Cologne, 156 ; regent 
for his father : his accession, 162 ; 
rejects proposed General Council, 
206, 207 ; at Westphalian Uictiiie, 
219 ; refuses to commit himself to 
proposed Council, 224 ; at peace 
meeting of Frankfort, 235 ; firm 
against the pope, 241 ; ap[iroves 
j\Ielanchthon's conduct at Regens- 
burg : his dispute over see of 
Naumlnirg, 245 ; expels Henry of 
Kruiiswick from his dominions, 246; 
insists on Luther's burial at Witten- 
berg, 255 ; appeals to Charles v. for 
justice, 267 ; takes up arms against 
iiim, 268 ; defeated and captured at 
Jliihlberg, 270 ; procures the sur- 
render of Wittenberg, 272, 273; 
])rotests against Augsburg Interim, 
280 ; liis release and return to 
Saxony, 295 ; his opinion of Duke 
Maurice, 297 ; resigns his electorate, 
and dies, 298. 

John Frederick ii., son of above, 
succeeds his father, ii. 298. 

John III., King of Portugal, procures 
mission of Kodriguez and Xavier to 
Pvast Indies, ii. 408; invites Peter of 
Alcantara to Portugal, 412. 

John the Stedfast, Elector of Saxony, 
aids to suppress Pfeasant War, i. 383; 
letter from his brother to him, 387 ; 
succeeds his brother, ii. 2 ; forms an 
alliance with Philip of Hesse, 3, 4 ; 
signs Protest of Speier, 21 ; repairs 
to Diet of Augsburg, 110 ; arrives 
there, 112 ; dissatisfied with the 
emperor's conduct, 115 ; consents to 
attend mass : signs Melanchthon's 
Confession, 116 ; obtains tlie title of 
Stedfast, 117 ; refused the Electoral 
Investiture, 123 ; leaves the Diet, 
131 ; at Diet of Schmalkalden, 156 ; 
protests against King Ferdinand's 
election, 156, 157 ; refuses to admit 
the Swiss to the Sehmalkaldic 
League, 158 ; rebuts Charles v.'s 
advances to liim: joined with Philip 
of Hesse as head of the League, 160 ; 
dies, 162: 

Jonas, Justus, visits Erasmus, i. 72 ; 
acccompanies Luther to Worms, 132; 
his family life, 420 ; at Marburg, ii. 
104; at Diet of Augsburg, 110; 
advises John Frederick i. against 

the General Council, 206 ; at Leip- 
sic, 236 ; settles at Halle, 238 ; 
accompanies Luther to Eisleben, 
253 ; present at his death, 255. 

Juda, Leo, friend of Zwingle, i. 234 ; 
arrives at Zurich, 292 ; at .second 
Conference there, 304 ; his energy as 
a Reformer, 325 ; liis controversy 
with the Anabaptists, ii. 33 ; forced 
to hide himself, 181 ; preaches 
against Zurich Government, 182 ; 
etl'ects of his preaching, 183 ; attends 
Conferences of Aarau and Basel, 

Julius III., his accession : re-summons 
the Council of Trent, ii. 288 ; dies, 
299 ; persecutes MoUio, 359 ; 
appealed to by Peter of Alcantara 
to reform the Franciscans, 412. 

Kaiser, his irregular execution, ii. 
87 ; its effect on Swiss politics, 91. 

Kappel, first war of, ii. 91 ; closed by 
Peace of Steinhausen, 94 ; second 
battle of, 164 ; its effects at Zurich, 
172 ; and throughout Switzerland, 

Karlstadt (or Bodenstein), his comba- 
tive character, i. 112 ; disputes with 
Eck on free-will, 117 ; compared 
with Luther, 121 ; violence of his 
opinions, 171 ; breach between him 
and Ijuther, 172 ; becomes entirely a 
demagogue, 186 ; opens Eucharistic 
controversy, 360-362 ; refused ad- 
mission to Marburg Disputation, ii. 
104 ; his connection with Schwenk- 
feldt, 384. 

Karsthans, origin and meaning of the 
name, i. 229. 

Kathrinenthal, violent suppression of 
the nunnery there, ii. 64. 

Kaiifi elected abbot of St. Gall : his 
flight, ii. 163. 

Kempe jjreaches Reformation doctrines 
at Hamburg, i. 211. 

Kessler of St. Gall, liis account of 
Melanchthon, i. 116 ; his journey 
to Wittenberg, 179 ; his interview 
with Luther in the inn, 180-184 ; his 
labours at St. Gall, 340. 

Ketelhudt, Reformer in Pomerania, i. 

Kettenbach, Henry of, powerfully 
preadies the Reformation in Ulin, 
i. 197. 

Knade, his marriage and persecutions, 
i. 214, 215. 

Knipperdolling establishes Anabaptist 
theocracy in Miinster, ii. 217 ; offi- 
ciates in it as executioner, 218 ; his 
liorrible death, 221. 



Knipsti'o, Pomeranian Reformer, liis 
sympathy with Luther, i. 214. 

Knophen, Reformation preacher in 
Pomerania, i. 214. 

Koch (or "Wimiiina) supports Tetzel 
against Luther, i. 100 ; confutes 
Augsburg Confession, ii. 123. 

Kolb, political and religious reformer 
at Bern, i. 263 ; at Disputation there, 
ii. 57 ; dies, 174. 

Kraft, Reformer at Fulda, i. 202 ; en- 
couraged hy Luther and Melanch- 
thon, 203 ; at Homburg Disputation, 
ii. 7. 

Kranach, Lucas, at Luther's marriage : 
his portraits of Luther and his wife, 
i. 401 ; accompanies John Frederick 
I. on his return to Saxony, ii. 295 ; 
takes Melanchthon's portrait after 
death, 354. 

Krantz labours as Reformer at Ham- 
burg, i. 211. 

Krautwald embraces Schwenkfeldt's 
doctrines : abusively attacked by 
Luther, ii. 386. 

Kiirssner. See Pellican. 

Lainez supports Crescentius at Coun- 
cil of Trent, ii. 399 ; joins the 
Jesuits, 406. 

Lambert, Francis, French Reformer, 
ii. 5 ; his early career, 6 ; at Hom- 
burg Disputation : his work in Hesse, 
7 ; his strict views and great 
success, 8 ; at Marburg Dispiitation, 
104 ; adheres to Zwingle's views on 
the Eucharist, 107 ; his influence on 
Patrick Hamilton, 153. 

Lambert of Thorn, his trial for heresy, 
i. 223, 224. 

Landenberg, Hugo von. Bishop of 
Constance, his promises to Zwingle, 
i. 251 ; opposes Samson, 253 ; dis- 
putes with Zwingle about Zurich 
fasts, 291 ; protests against the 
Zurich Reformation, 310 ; driven 
from Constance, ii. 62. 

Lange, Reformed preacher, i. 170 ; 
corresponds with Luther, 281. 

Lasky, leading Polish Reformer, ii. 
357, 358 and note. 

Latin, remarks on its use by the 
Reformers, ii. 371, 372. 

Leipsic, disputation there by Luther, 
Eck, and Karlstadt, i. 116 ; import- 
ance of these disputations, 116 ; its 
result favourable to the Reformation, 
123 ; conference held there by 
Maurice of Saxony, nature of the 
interim then concluded, ii. 283. 

Leo X. opposes Luther, i. 28 ; his in- 
fidelity, 36 ; protects Reuchlin, 53 ; 

his artistic tastes, 94 ; his scorn of 

Indulgence controversy, 103 ; dies, 

Leyden, John of, arrives at Miinster, 

ii. 217 ; becomes its king, 218 ; his 

cruelty, 219, 220 ; his capture on 

the fall of the city, 220 ; his horrible 

death, 221. 
Libertines, want of acci;rate knowledge 

of their tenets, ii. 330 ; their 

quarrels with Calvin, 341. 
Limperger, Reformation preacher at 

Basel, ii. 51, 79. 
Link corresponds with Luther, i. 146; 

preaches at Buchholz, I7l. 
Lismann, leading Polish Reformer, ii. 

Locarno, the Protestant Church there, 

ii. 360 ; exile of its members, 361 ; 
indiLstries brought by them to 

Zurich, 380, note. 
Loriti, friend of Zwingle, i. 236 ; 
lectures at Basel, 268 ; friend of 
Erasmus, 289 ; leaves Basel, ii. 79. 
Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, ii. 404 ; 
his early life : his retirement at 
Montserrat, 405 ; his studies : his 
mystical character : originates the 
Order, 406 ; refuses to call it after 
himself, 407 ; dies, 408. 
Luther, Hans, father of the Reformer, 

his social position, i. 79. 
Luther, James, brother of the Reformer, 
accompanies him to Worms, i. 132 ; 
separated from him, 138. 
Luther, Martin, really originates the 
Reformation, i. 22, 78 ; his literary 
influence, 33 ; connection between 
him and the Humanists, 78 ; his 
birth and family, 79 ; his education, 
80 ; at Erfurt, 81 ; enters the 
monastery, 82 ; value of his ex- 
perience there, 83, 84 ; timid about 
preaching, 85, 86 ; contrasted with 
Erasmus, 83, 87, 278, 289 ; at 
Wittenberg,. 87 ; at Rome, 88, 89 ; 
his views of justification, 90, 91 ; 
begins his reformatory work on the 
defensive, 93 ; attacks the Indulgence 
system,. 96 ; his theses, 97, 98 ; 
appeals to the bishops on them, 99 ; 
controversy excited by his theses, 
100 ;. challenges Tetzel to personal 
disputation, 101 ; his coarseness in 
controversy, 102 ; at Heidelberg 
Conference,. 103 ; appeals to the pope, 
104; summoaed to Augsburg Diet: 
disputes there with Cajetan, 105 ; 
flees thence, 106 ; doubts his future 
course, 106, 107 ; examined by 
Miltitz, 108 ; again appeals to the 
pope: slow development of his views, 



109 ; his attachment to the Church, 

110 ; his fiicndshij) for ]\Ielanohthon, 
115 ; disputes with Eck at Leiiisic, 
116, 117 ; supports some of the 
Hussite tenets, 119 ; accused of 
witchcraft, 120 ; described by 
Moscllanus, 121 ; superior to both 
Karlstadt and Eck, 122 ; supported 
by nobility, 123 ; publishes Refor- 
mation treatises, 125 ; again appeals 
to the pope, 126 ; his reception of 
Eck's bull, 128 ; publicly burns it, 

129 ; importance of this action, 129, 

130 ; summoned to Diet of Worms : 
his position, 131 ; journey thither, 
132, 133 ; enters Worms, 134 ; be- 
fore the Diet, 135-137 ; leaves 
Worms, 138 ; taken to Wartburg, 
139; his life there, 139-144; his 
translation of the Bible, 143-150 ; 
its excellencies and defects, 145- 
150 ; its publication, 149 ; its posi- 
tion in German history, 151-154 ; 
his views of the Bible, 154-161 ; 
his treatises written at the Wart- 
burg, 166-168 ; corresponds with 
Archbishop Albert, 167 ; and with 
Capito, 168 ; visits Wittenberg, 169 ; 
disapproves Karlstadt's violence, 
172 ; his attitude to the Zwickau 
"prophets," 175; leaves the Wart- 
burg : writes to the elector on this 
step, 176, 177 ; and to the Nurem- 
berg Diet, 178 ; his interview with 
Kessler, 180-184; his tolerant views, 
175, 184, 185 ; fails to calm the 
Zwickau "prophets," 186 ; coarse- 
ness of his controversy with Henry 
VIII., 187, 188; repudiates authority 
of custom, 190 ; unfavourably dis- 
posed towards Edict of Nuremberg, 

192, 193 ; darkening of his life, 

193, 194 ; writes to Reformers at 
Esslingen, 199 ; at Stras.sburg, 202 ; 
at Ratisbon, 205 ; at Iiigolstadt, 
207 ; at Worms, 208, 209 ; and at 
Miltenberg, 209 ; his letters and 
poem on Dutch persecutions, 225, 
226 ; adheres to the pericopes, 241, 
and ii. 13; his doubtful attitude to 
Erasmus, i. 281, 282 ; contrasted 
with Hutten, 285 ; disputes with 
Erasmus on free-will, 289 ; ])arallcl 
b(;tween him and Zwingle, 353-361, 
377, 378 ; his influence on the Swiss 
Reformation, 354 ; his views of the 
Eucharist, 359, 360 ; origin of these 
views, 360-363 ; his treatise against 
Karlstadt, 363, 364 ; violently de- 
nounces Zwingle and fficolampadius, 
370 ; his partial sympathy with the 
Peasant War, 388-390 ; distin- 

guishes reformation from revolution, 
390, 391 ; hiscourtship and marriage, 
400, 401 ; his severe sickness, 404 ; 
his trust in prayer, 405, 406 ; his 
family affection, 407, 411 ; his 
prayer in Melanchthon's sickness, 

408 ; sees the necessity of recreation, 

409 ; delights in nature, 413 ; his 
sociability, 415 ; his love of music, 
416 ; careless in worldly affairs, 417, 
418 ; his hospitality and charity, 
418 ; establishes the mass in German, 
ii. 9 ; his views on the liturgy, 10, 
11 ; and on private services, 12 ; 
his catechisms, 13, 19, 20 ; his 
preaching, and opinion of ordinances, 
14 ; his scruples about League of 
Rotach, 22 ; his political views 
compared with Zwingle's, 88-91 ; 
violence of his Eucharistic treatises, 
97, 100 ; hopes little from Disputa- 
tion at Marljurg, 103 ; arrives there, 
104 ; his violent conduct there, 105, 
106 ; objects to leagues against the 
emperor : his expectations from Diet 
of Augsburg, 109 ; goes thither, but 
remains at Coburg, 110 ; his life 
there. 111, 112 ; writes to Melanch- 
thon on his Confession, 116 ; and on 
its confutation, 124 ; his opinion of 
the Augsburg Recess, 131 ; con- 
trasted with Zwingle, 137-140 ; 
their substantial agreement, 140 ; 
disapproves Philip of Hesse's Swiss 
alliance, 157 ; but agrees to recog- 
nise the Tetrapolitans, 159 ; his 
unseemly view of Zwingle's death, 
166 ; advises John Frederick i. 
against the General Council, 206 ; 
warns the Miinster Protestants, 215 ; 
his views on fall of Miinster, 222 ; 
his interview with Vergerio, 223 ; 
his harsh views of the Zwinglians, 
227 ; objects to all political alliance 
with them, 228 ; his temporary con- 
cessions to Bucer, 230 ; writes to 
Burgomaster Meyer, 231 ; and to 
the Confederate States, 232 ; draws 
up Schmalkaldic Confession for 
Mantuan Council, 233 ; his hostility 
to the pope, 234 ; preaches at Leipsic, 
236 ; writes to Protestants at Halle, 
238, 239 ; dissatisfied with Regens- 
burg Interim, 243 ; false reports of 
his death circulated : resolves to 
leave Wittenberg, 251 ; comparative 
calm of his later years, 252 ; journeys 
to Eisleben, 253 ; attacked there by 
sickness, 254; dies, 255 ; his, funeral, 
255, 256 ; subsequent history of hi.s 
family, 257 ; nature of his greatness 
reviewed, 258-260 ; predominance 



of his faith, and of his German 
character, 263 ; liis too controversial 
bent, 265 ; permanence of his hos- 
tility to Zwingle, 265, note ; his 
tomb respected by Charles v., 275 ; 
his attitude to Calvin, 321 ; dis- 
approves doctrinal persecutions, 340 ; 
his superstitious views of natural 
phenomena, 375 ; his views of 
amusements compared with Calvin's, 

MAGDEBi'ftG, League of, ii. 4 ; rejects 
Augsburg Interim, 280 ; besieged by 
Maurice of Saxony, 289 ; its capture 
by him, and moderation of his 
terms, 290. 

Major, Wittenberg theologian, his 
share in Melanchthon's obsequies, 
ii. 354. 

Mansfeld, Counts of, their disagree- 
ment referred to Luther, ii. 253 ; 
Count Albert visits him in sickness, 
254 ; they desire his burial at Eisle- 
ben, 255 ; but escort the funeral to 
Wittenberg, 256. 

Manuel, Bernese satirist of the Church, 
i. 265 ; his poem on Baden Disputa- 
tion, ii. 43 ; sent to Basel, 72. 

Manz, Swiss Anabaptist, ii. 24, 25 ; 
drowned at Zurich, 34. 

Marburg, University there, ii. 8 ; pro- 
jected Eucharistic disputation at, 
22 ; preparation for it, 103 ; its 
beginning, 104; incidents of, 105, 
106 ; articles agreed upon there, 
106, 107. 

Margaret, Queen of Navarre, protects 
French Reformers, i. 247 ; including 
Calvin, ii. 305 ; his correspondence 
with her, 347. 

Marinari opposes certain decrees of 
the Council of Trent, ii. 397, 398. 

Mariolatry, its rise, i. 13. 

Marius opposes CEcolampadius at 
Basel, ii. 52 ; leaves Basel, 74. 

Marot, his metrical version of the 
Psalms, ii. 377. 

;Mary, Queen of England, persecutes 
the Protestants, ii. 364. 

Mary, Regent of the Netherlands, 
intercedes for Philip of Hesse, ii. 
292 ; compelled by her position to 
persecute the Protestants, 356. 

Matthesius, his account of Staupitz, i. 
84, note ; writes Luther's biography, 
88 ; his comments on Luther at 
Worms, 134 ; on Luther's vehe- 
mence, 393 ; on Luther at Coburg, 
ii. 110. 

Matthias, his arrival at Miinster, ii. 
217 ; his death, 218. 

Maurice, Duke of Saxony, succeeds his 
father, ii. 236 ; invades the Saxon 
electorate for Charles v., 269 ; re- 
ceives it from the emperor, 273 ; 
takes possession of Wittenberg, 275; 
his attitude favourable to Protestant- 
ism, 276 ; disapproves the Augsburg 
Interim, 280 ; holds religious con- 
ferences terminating in Leijjsic 
Interim, 283 ; rejects the proposed 
Council : besieges Magdeburg, 289 ; 
captures it : forms designs against 
Charles v., 290 ; his grief for Philip 
of Hesse's sufferings, 291 ; makes 
war on the emperor, 294 ; his vic- 
tories, 294, 295 ; concludes Treaty 
of Passau, 295 ; dies, 297 ; his 
character, 297, and note ; gives the 
Reformation a political character, 

Maximilian I. , i. 26; divides the empire 
into circles, 31 ; establishes "public 
peace," 32 ; tries to suppress 
Reuchlinian controversy, 53 ; dies, 

Mebler, Reformation preacher at Naum- 
burg-Zeitz, ii. 245. 

Megander, labours with Zwingle at 
Zurich, i. 325 ; at Bern Disputation, 
ii. 55 ; and at Basel Conference, 229. 

Melanchthon, his education, i. 112, 
113 ; his learning : link between 
Erasmus and Luther, 114 ; popular 
as a teacher : importance of his re- 
lations with Luther, 115 ; goes with 
Luther and Karlstadt to Leipsic, 
116; impressed with Luther's de- 
meanour there, 119 ; his share in 
translating the Bible, 146 ; his 
Manual of Doctrine, 161-166 ; his 
Augustinianism, 162-164 ; his views 
ou the Eucharist, 165, 166 ; visited 
by Luther at Wittenberg, 169; his 
doubts of the Zwickau " prophets," 
174, 175; his friendship for Eberlin, 
196 ; visits Kraft at Fulda, 203 ; 
his aristocratic views on Peasant 
War, 386 ; his theory of divine 
right, 386, 387 ; his severe sickness 
at Weimar, 408 ; rebuked by Luther 
for over-study, 409 ; his family life, 
419 ; his studious habits, 420 ; his 
interview with Philip of Hesse, ii. 3 ; 
goes to Marburg, 104 ; at Diet of 
Augsburg, 110 ; draws up Augsburg 
Confession, 116 ; his oiiinion of its 
confutation, 123 ; his apology for 
the Confession, 125 ; diaws up 
Schmalkaldic Declaration, 157, 158; 
advises John Frederick i. against 
General Council, 206 ; desires settle- 
ment of the Eucharistic controversy, 



228 ; his comparatively mild views 
of the ]>ope, 234 ; sets out for 
Hagi'iiau ConferencL', but is detained 
by sickness, 2-10 ; meets Calvin at 
"XVorms, 241 ; disputes with the 
Komanists at Diet of Eegensburt;, 
242 ; regrets his concessions, 244 ; 
draws up Wittenhrrgische Eefor- 
mation, 250 ; his feelings on 
Luther's death, 25(3, 257 ; assists to 
draw up Leipsic Interim, 283 ; his 
painful position, 284, 285 ; his 
reception of Flacius' attack, 280 ; 
encouraged by Bucer and Pliilip of 
Hesse, 287 ; visits the Council with 
Hessian Confession, 289 ; welcomes 
John Frederick i. on his release, 
295 ; ajiproves punishing heresv, 
340 ; his last days, 352, 353 ; h'is 
death and burial, 354 ; his estima- 
tion of Aristotle, 373 ; his astrological 
tendencies, 375 ; performs Philip of 
Hesse's second marriage, 378, note ; 
opposes Schwenkfeldt, 387 ; attempts 
union with the Greek Cluircli, 41(5. 

Itlelander, Protestant preacher at Augs- 
burg, ii. 211 ; preaches on conquest 
of Brunswick, 246. 

Meltinger, i. 267 ; his conduct in Basel 
insurrection, 397 ; hostile to the 
lleformation, ii. 71 ; his temporizing 
conduct, 74, 75 ; flees from Basel, 76. 

Memmingcn presides at second Zurich 
Conference, i. 298. 

Meyer, Adelberg, burgomaster in 
Basel, i. 267 ; his conduct in RiJub- 
lin's case, 271 ; and in Basel insur- 
rection, 397 ; shares in Peformation 
victory there, ii. 71. 

Meyer, James, guildmaster of Basel, 
ii. 71 ; Luther's regard for him, 231, 

Meyer, Peter, opposes Ibach at Frank- 
fort, i. 202. 

Meyer, Sebastian, Swiss Reformer, i. 
264 ; at Conference of Zurich, 293- 
295 ; his perilous position at Bern, 
326 ; his controversy with Heim, 329. 

Miani founds the Order of Somaskers : 
his cliarities, ii. 403. 

Miltitz sent on embassy to Saxony, i. 
107 ; confers with Luther, 108 ; 
advises him to conciliate the pope, 

Moller labours as Reformer at Bremen, 
i. 211, 212 ; his martyrdom, 212. 

Mollio, his ])owerful Reformation 
jireaching in Italy, ii. 358 ; his trial 
and martyrdom, 359. 

Monasticism, advantages of: decline of, 
i. 10; its asceticism causes its laxity, 
11 ; its influence on the Church, 12 ; 

rivalry of its orders, 41 ; rise of new 
orders, ii. 399. 

Montfaucon, Bishop of Lau.sanne, tries 
to silence John Mailer, 257 ; en- 
shrines false relics of St. Anna, 262, 
263 ; accuses Bernese Reformers of 
heresy, 264. 

More, Sir Thomas, friend of Erasmus, 
i. (34, 68 ; hostile to the monks, 68, 
note ; his Eucharistic views, 368. 

Mosellanus presides at J^eipsic Dis- 
putation, i. 116 ; his account of the 
Disputation, 120 et seq. 

Miihlberg, battle of, ii. 270. 

Miihlhausen, Hutten there, i. 287 ; its 
Reformation, 336. 

Miinster, professor at Basel, ii. 81, 82. 

Miinster, beginnings of l!eformation 
there, ii. 213 ; Anabaptist excesses 
at, 217 ; X)olygamy established at, 
218 ; attempts made to suppress its 
crimes, 219 ; its siege and capture, 
220 ; effects of its capture on Pro- 
testantism generally, 221. 

Miinzer, one of the Zwickau "prophets," 
i. 173; his share in Peasant War, 
378 ; his low opinion of Luther, 
381 ; his excesses, 382 ; limits his 
operations to Saxony, 383 ; his 
execution, 384 ; his career in Switzer- 
land, ii. 23 ; influences Hnbmaier, 36. 

Murner, his controversy in rhyme with 
Stiefel, i. 199 ; satirized in popular 
ballads, 229 ; his talents as a satirist, 
ii. 42 ; his violent language at Baden 
Disi)utation, 47. 

Myconius, Felix, son of Oswald 
Myconius, his scruples about classical 
study, ii. 372. 

Myconius, Frederick, his account of 
Luther's journey to Worms, i. 133 ; 
preaches Reformed doctrines, 170 ; 
labours at Leipsic, ii. 237. 

Myconius, Oswald, procures Zwingle's 
call to Zurich, i. 239 ; his place in 
Swiss Reformation, 243 ; assists 
Zwingle at Zuricli, 325 ; expelled 
i'rom Lucerne, 344 ; professor at 
Basel, ii. 82 ; his opinion of Augs- 
burg Confession, 123 ; succeeds 
G^lcolamjiadius, 176 ; persecuted at 
Zurich, 181 ; .sketch of his life, 184 ; 
his work at Basel, 184, 185 ; attends 
Aarau and Basel Conferences, 229. 

Mysticism supplies wants of Scholas- 
ticism, i. 15 ; its influence on 
Luther, 87. 

Nassau, Count of, negotiates with John 
of Saxony for the emperor, ii. 112, 

Naumburg-Zeitz, bishopric of, dispute 



over its succession, ii. 245 ; Treaty 

of, between Augustus and John 

Frederick of Saxony, 298. 
Neri. See Philip of. 
Netherlands, progress of Reformation, 

ii. 356. 
Neuchatel, Farel preaches there, ii. 

188 ; course of Reformation there, 

189 ; its triumph, 191. 
Nuremberg, fame of, i. 31 ; progress of 

Reformation at, 203 ; Diet of : })eace 
concluded there between Protestants 
and Catholics, ii. 161 ; renewal of 
the peace, 244. 

Oberhasi.itiial, Romanist reaction at, 
ii. 58 ; suppressed by Bern, 59. 

Occhino, the brothers, join in Valdez' 
" Blessed Fellowship" in Naples, ii. 
358 ; Bernardino conies to England, 
364 ; his previous connection with 
the Capuchins, 401. 

Odense, Diet of, Danish Reformation 
established there, ii. 155. 

CEchslin at Zurich, i. 238 ; and at 
Thurgau, 338; at Baden Disputation, 
ii. 44. 

(Ecolampadius, his testimony to the 
contempt of sacred things, i. 39, 40 ; 
studies under Reuchlin, 49, 276 ; 
teaches Brenz Greek, 198 ; adopts 
Zwingle's style of preacliing, 241 ; 
his birth and education, 275, 276 ; 
his monastic retirement : chaplain to 
Francis von Sickingen, 277 ; his 
work at Basel, 278 ; refuses to attend 
Zurich Conference, 293 ; receives 
Farel at Basel, 330 ; his reforms 
there, 334 ; his views on the Euchar- 
istic controversy, 365-367 ; his 
treatise on that subject, 368-370 ; 
his desire for yjcace, 371, 372 ; his 
marriage, 402 ; his family, 403 ; his 
affection for them, 407, note ; dis- 
])utes with the Anabaptists, ii. 34 ; at 
Disputation of Baden, 43 ; his 
success there, 45, 46 ; but is ex- 
communicated, 47 ; false rumours of 
his recantation, 48 ; his difficult 
])osition at Basel : introduces German 
psalm-singing, 50 ; his catechisms, 
61 ; disputes with Marius, 52 ; con- 
sequent disturbances, 53 ; at Bern 
Disputation, 55 : institutes a church 
visitation, 68 ; professor in Basel 
University, 82 ; opposes Luther in 
Eucharistic controversy, 102 ; sets 
out for Marburg, 103 ; his sickness, 
174 ; dies, 175 ; his character, 176 ; 
friend of Farel, 187. 

Oetenbach, nunnery of, Zwingle 
preaches there, i. 315 

Olivetanus translates the Bible, ii. 
199 ; kinsman of Calvin : his influence 
on him, 304. 

Oposinus, printer and publisher at 
Basel, receives Castellio, ii. 329 ; 
reference to his father's abandon- 
ment of art, 376. 

Ortwin satirizes Reuchlin, i. 53 ; is 
liimself satirized by Hutten : the 
Ej'idolce obscurm-um vlrorum ad- 
dressed to him, 56. 

Osiander, Reformation preacher at 
Nuremberg, i. 204 ; at JIarburg, ii. 
104 ; at Worms Conference, 244 ; 
his work at Neuburg, 247. 

Pack, his fictitious plot, ii. 16, 17. 

Paleario, Aonio, probable author of 
the Del henejicio di Christo : his life 
and martyrdom, ii. 360 ; reception 
of that book, 359. 

Papacy, its advantages, i. 8, 9 ; its 
decline, 10 ; its expenses, 93, 94. 

Passau, Treaty of, concluded between 
King Ferdinand and Maurice of 
Saxony, ii. 295 ; its provisions, 296. 

Paul III., his accession: his liberal 
tendencies, ii. 228 ; summons 
(Ecumenical Council at Mantua, 
233 ; opposed to Recess of Speier, 
249 ; issues a bull against Schmal- 
kaldic League, 267 ; adjourns the 
Council of Trent to Bologna, 276 ; 
dies, 288 ; authorizes Pauline Order, 
401 ; and Order of Jesuits, 407 ; 
gives it new privileges, 408 ; re- 
organizes the Inquisition, 415. 

Paulines or Barnabites, Order of, its 
constitution and character, ii. 401. 

Peasant War, early outbreaks of, i. 

379 ; caused by the Reformation, 

380 ; its Twelve Articles : its ex- 
cesses, 382 ; its bloody course, 383 ; 
its bad effects on the country, 384 ; 
not exclusively a Reformation move- 
ment, 385. 

Pellican, Reformer at Basel, i. 270 ; 

abandons his Order, 330. 
Perrin, his hostility to Calvin, his sub- 
sequent banishment, ii. 332 ; his 

efforts on behalf of Servetus, 337 ; 

returns to Geneva, 341 ; forced to 

leave, 342. 
Peter of Alcantara, ii. 410; his ascetic 

life, 411 ; rigourof his religion, 412 ; 

his death : his influence on St. 

Theresa, 413. 
Peterson, Swedish Reformer, i. 219 ; 

favoured by Gustavus Vasa, 220 ; 

at Diet of Westeras, ii. 154. 
Peucer, Melanchthon's son-in-law, i. 

419 ; fears for Melanchthon's health. 



ii. 353 ; present at his death-bed, 

Pfefferkorn, his attacks on the Jews, i. 
50 ; and on Reuchlin, 52. 

rfeffinger, John, of Leipsic, ii. 233 ; 
prepares Leipsic Interim, 2S3. 

I'l'eifer, renegade monk, takes part iu 
the Peasant War, i. 381. 

PIlug, Julius von, at Diet of Regens- 
burg, ii. 242 ; elected Bishop of 
Nauinburg, 245 ; employed by- 
Charles V. to draw up Augsbui-g In- 
terim, 278. 

Pliilip, Archduke of Austria, son of 
Maxmilian i., father of Charles v., 
marries Joanna, i. 26. 

Philip the Magnanimous, Landgrave of 
Hesse, supports Luther at Worms, 
i. 138 ; puts down Peasant War, 
383 ; his alliance with John of 
Saxony, ii. 2 ; his accession and 
character, 3 ; fiiend of Luther, 
Melanchthon, and Zwingle, 4 ; at 
Diet of Speier : his zeal for the Re- 
formation, 5 ; signs Protest of Speier, 
21 ; wishes disputation on the 
Eucharist, 22 ; his liospitality at 
Marburg Disputation, 104 ; wishes 
to reconcile Luther to Zwingle, 106 ; 
embraces Zwingle's Eucharistic 
views, 108 ; at Diet of Augsburg, 
112 ; protests against the emperor's 
mandate, 115 ; signs Melanchthon's 
Confession, 116 ; leaves the Diet, 
123 ; concludes alliance with Swiss 
Reformed cantons : at Diet of 
Schmalkalden, 156 ; joint-head of 
the League with John of Saxony, 
160 ; dissatisfied with Peace of 
Nuremberg, 162 ; reinstates lllrich 
of Wurtemberg, 207 ; mediates in 
Miinster Reformation, 215; aids to 
suppress Miinster Anabaptists, 219 ; 
at peace meeting of Frankfort, 235 ; 
and Diet of Regensburg, 241 ; expels 
Henry of P>runswick from his do- 
minions, 246 ; his defiant letter to 
the emperor, 267; takes arms against 
him, 268 ; quarrels with Schiirtlin, 
2G9 ; surrenders to the emperor, 
273 ; is imprisoned, 274 ; his con- 
duct in captivity, 280; writes to 
encourage Melanchthon, 287 ; length 
of his captivity, 289 ; his sutferings, 
290 ; complains to Maurice, 291 ; 
fruitless intercessions made for liini, 
292 ; his religious consolations, 293 ; 
renewed efforts for his deliverance, 
294 ; his final release and return to 
He.sse, 296 ; his opinion of Maurice 
of Saxony, 297 ; represents the jioli- 
tical side of the Reformation, 362 ; 

scandal of his bigamous marriage, 

377, 378, note. 
Philip of Neri, his mj'stical ecstasies, 

ii. 409 ; his jn'actical religion : his 

death, 410. 
Pirckheimer, eminent Humanist, i. 53; 

Relormer at Nuremberg, 203 ; his 

Eucharistic views, 370. 
Pius IV. testifies to Calvin's disinter- 
estedness, ii. 343 ; reopens Council 

of Trent, 399. 
Poland, progress of Reformation in, ii. 

Polenz, Bishop of Samland, joins the 

Reformers, i. 216, 217. 
Prierias supports Dominicans against 

Reuchlin, i. 54 ; and Tetzel against 

Luther, 101. 
Protest of Speier, ii. 21. 

R.EF0RM.4.TI0N divides medieval and 
modern church history, i. 1 ; its 
place in history disputed, 2, 3 ; fore- 
runners of, 19, 42 ; excesses in, 20 ; 
centres in Germany, 23 ; periods of, 
24; its law-abiding character, 171 ; 
not responsible for fanatical excesses, 
174 ; becomes great European ques- 
tion, 192; its rapid and unsystematic 
extension, 195 ; its course in Ger- 
many and in Switzerland contrasted, 
346-349 ; its true character investi- 
gated, ii. 140-142; prominence 
given by it to the person of Christ, 
146-149 ; its operation primarily re- 
ligious, 367 ; its indirect influence 
on politics, 368, 369 ; on science, 
370-373 ; on philosophy, 373 ; on 
history and natural philosophy, 374 ; 
on art, 375, 376 ; on morals, 377- 
379 ; on schools, 379 ; on civil and 
domestic life, 380 ; on public amuse- 
ments, 381 ; on family life, 382. 

Regensburg, Diet of, ii. 241-243 ; In- 
terim agreed ujion, 243 ; progress of 
Reformation at, 247. 

Renee, Duchess of Ferrara, gives pro- 
tection to Calvin, ii. 312; his letter 
to her, 348. 

Reuchlin, his early life at Paris Uni- 
versity, i. 45 ; at Basel studies 
Greek and law, 46 ; employed diplo- 
matically : his death, 47 ; zealous in 
study of Greek and Hebrew, 48 ; 
practises the Cabala, 49 ; his tolerant 
views of the Jews, 50, 51 ; quarrels 
with Pfefferkorn, 52, 53 ; decision in 
liis favour at Rome, 54 ; dream of his 
death : his supporters in the Jewish 
controversy, 55 ; praises Wimphel- 
ing, 75 ; teaches Eck, 103 ; patron- 
izes Melanchthon, 113. 


Eliegius, TJrbanus, Reformer at Augs- 
burg, i. 205 ; and at Ulm, 370. 

Ridley, English Reformer, ii. 363 ; his 
martyrdom, 364. 

Ritter, his work at SchafThausen, ii. 
85, 86. 

Riverta, Papal legate, procures banish- 
ment of Locarnese Protestants, ii. 

Rodriguez joins the Jesuits, ii. 406 ; 
goes as missionary to the East Indies, 

Rottmann, Reformation preacher at 
Miinster, ii. 214; his attitude to the 
Anabaptists, 216; iinally joins them, 
218 ; falls in siege of Miinster, 220. 

Roublin, Reformer at Basel, i. 270 ; 
expelled by the priests, 271 ; his dis- 
orderly conduct at Zurich, 290, note ; 
joins the Anabaptists, 333, and ii. 24. 

Roussel, French Reformer, i. 227. 

Roust, burgomaster of Zurich, supports 
Zwingle there, i. 240 ; and John 
Haller, 257 ; opens Conference of 
Zurich, 293 ; at second Zurich Con- 
ference, 304 ; and at Bern Disputa- 
tion, ii. 54. 

Rubianus, Crotus, author of the Epis- 
tolce obscu7'07-um virorum, 1 56 ; their 
character, 57 ; induces Hutten to 
go to Erfurt, 58 ; receives Luther at 
Erfurt, 132. 

Sachs, Hans, poet of the Nuremberg 
Reformation, i. 33 ; his admiration 
of Luther, 203. 

Sadolet, Cardinal, his letter to Geneva, 
ii. 320 ; visits Calvin, 344 ; warns 
Paleario, 360. 

St. Gall, disputed succession to its 
abbey, ii. 162. 

Salmeron supports Crescentius at Coun- 
cil of Trent, ii. 399 ; joins the Jesuits, 

Sam, principal Reformer at Ulm, i. 

Samson sells indulgences in Switzer- 
land, i. 95, 244 ; his conduct and 
reception, 251-254. 

Saunier accompanies Farel to Geneva, 
ii. 196 ; is banished thence, 317. 

Saxony, partition of, i. 30 ; visitation 
of its churches, ii. 17 ; their bad con- 
dition, 18 ; second partition of, by 
Treaty of Naumburg, 296. 

Schachtorp, circumstances attending 
his death, ii. 212. 

Schappeler, Reformation preacher at 
Memmingen, i. 206. 

Schartlin commands upland contingent 
of Protestant army, ii. 268 ; quarrels 
with the Landgrave Philip, 269. 


Schenk preaches under the protection 
of Henry of Saxony, ii. 236. 

Schinner, Bishop of Sitten, appears to 
favour Zwingle, i. 251 ; assists to ex- 
pose the Jetzer afiair, 262 ; native of 
Yalais, 342. 

Schlegel, abbot of St. Lucien, defends 
Romanist doctrines at Ilanz Disputa- 
tion, ii. 39, 40. 

Schleswig, progress of Reformation in, 
i. 210. 

Schmalkalden, League of, ii. 108 ; 
second Diet of, 157 ; its inconclusive 
result : its third meeting, 157 ; the 
League formed: its objects: the Swiss 
excluded, 158 ; it is consummated at 
Frankfort, 160 ; recognises Ferdinand 
as Roman king, 208 ; puts off Vei"- 
gerio's demand for a Council, 224 ; 
finally refuses it, 233 ; concludes 
truce of Frankfort, 235 ; meets at 
Frankfort - on - Main, 250 ; finally 
breaks with Charles v., 267 ; is anni- 
hilated, 274 ; condemns Schwenk- 
feldt's tenets, 387. 

Schmid at second